Vranic v Director General, Department of Housing

[2001] NSWADT 60

CITATION:	Vranic -v- Director General, Department of Housing [2001] NSWADT 60
DIVISION:	General Division
PARTIES:	APPLICANT Ljubica Vranic RESPONDENT Director General, Department of Housing
FILE NUMBER:	013033
HEARING DATES:	11/04/2001
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED:	04/11/2001
DATE OF DECISION:	04/19/2001
BEFORE:	O'Connor K - DCJ (President)
APPLICATION:	access to documents - personal affairs - Freedom of Information Act - access to documents - personal affairs
MATTER FOR DECISION:	Principal matter
LEGISLATION CITED:	Freedom of Information Act 1989
CASES CITED:
REPRESENTATION:	APPLICANT In person RESPONDENT C Valacos, solicitor
ORDERS:	1. Decision under appeal affirmed.

1 This is the second case dealt with on the same day involving this applicant, and again her application for review (filed 12 February 2001) relates to an agency decision (internal review decision 25 January 2001) only to disclose part of a document in response to a request made under the Freedom of Information Act 1989 (‘the Act’).

2 The Department of Housing released with deletions a document held on the applicant’s tenancy file headed ‘Advice of Vacant Dwelling’. The document contained personal particulars in respect of the previous tenant. The Department relied on the personal affairs exemption (cl 6 of Sched 1 of the Act) to justify withholding access.

3 The applicant, as in the other case, expressed concern that information about other people was on her file when she had not given permission for that. She said here, as she had in the previous case, that she felt that she had a right to know whether other people’s information was in ‘her file’ and what that was.

4 The document was on the file as part of a normal administrative procedure followed by the Department (in contrast to the previous case where the document in dispute appeared to have been placed with the file inadvertently). The Department was represented by one of its solicitors, Mr Valacos. He explained that in the course of approving a new tenant, the Department sought advice as to whether the premises to be allocated to the new tenant were in fact vacant. That advice was supplied on a form headed Advice of Vacant Dwelling, signed in this instance by a Tenancy Manager and dated 20 June 1995. It had a section in which the name, new address and contact details of the previous tenant were recorded. It contained sections for recording the outgoing tenant’s rental record and their reasons for vacating the premises. It was placed on the file of the new tenant.

5 A copy of the document in the form that it was given to the applicant was provided to the Tribunal. I was not supplied with the original, unexpurgated document. I did not ask for it, as I was able to satisfy myself from the document supplied that the blacked out portions were all alongside sections providing for the inclusion of personal and rental history particulars relating to the previous tenant. I am satisfied that those particulars can all reasonably be regarded as information relating to personal affairs which it would be unreasonable to disclose.

6 Accordingly, I accept that this is a case to which the personal affairs exemption could properly be applied.

7 On the other hand, I should indicate that there does seem to be some point to the concern of the applicant. It is not immediately obvious to the Tribunal why it is necessary or relevant for detailed information about a previous tenant to appear on the file relating to the current tenant.

8 The decision under review is affirmed.