Sibelco v Right to Information Commissioner

In the case of Sibelco v Right to Information Commissioner, the dispute was about whether certain documents should be released under the Right to Information Act 2009 (Qld). The matter was before the Queensland Court of Appeal, where the primary issue was whether the hearing of the appeal should be conducted de novo or as a judicial review. The appellant, Sibelco, argued that the appeal should be heard as a de novo hearing, meaning a fresh hearing on all the evidence and submissions, rather than a review of the decision made by the Information Commissioner.

The court had to determine the appropriate standard of review for the appeal, considering whether the Information Commissioner correctly interpreted the law and exercised their discretion in accordance with the statutory provisions. Additionally, the court examined whether the Commissioner properly considered whether the disclosure of the documents would breach confidence and whether the documents fell outside the scope of the access application. The court found that the appeal should have been heard de novo, as there were errors in the Commissioner's approach to the scope of the access application and the consideration of the breach of confidence argument.

The Court of Appeal held that the decision of the Information Commissioner should be set aside and the matter returned for reconsideration. The court concluded that the Commissioner did not properly consider whether the disclosure of the documents would breach confidence and whether the documents fell outside the scope of the access application. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the decision of the Information Commissioner was set aside. The matter was returned to the Information Commissioner for reconsideration, allowing for a fresh assessment of the evidence and submissions in light of the Court of Appeal's findings.