Civil and Administrative Tribunal
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Walker v Roads and Maritime Services [2019] NSWCATAD 177 Hearing dates: 26 July 2019 Date of orders: 30 August 2019 Decision date: 30 August 2019 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: G Blake AM SC, Senior Member Decision: The decision of the respondent made on 8 February 2019 that it holds no further documents relating to the design of the truck arrester bed in the Mona Vale Road East Upgrade Project is affirmed.
Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW – Freedom of Information - Government Information (Public Access) – setting aside of summons - considerations - access to information - adequacy of search Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW)
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)
Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW)Cases Cited: Amos v Central Coast Council [2018] NSWCATAD 101
Camilleri v Commissioner of Police (NSW) [2012] NSWADT 5 at [15]
Cianfrano v Director General Department of Commerce (No 2) [2006] NSWADT 195
Hemeon v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2002] NSWADT 201
Lonsdale v University of Sydney [2015] NSWCATAP 277
Mizzi v Commissioner of Police (NSW) [2013] NSWADT 150
MJ v Department of Education and Communities [2014] NSWCATAD 12
Robinson v Commissioner of Police [2014] NSWCATAP 73
Webb v Port Stephens Council [2018] NSWCATAP 224Category: Principal judgment Parties: Philip Charles Walker (Applicant)
Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Applicant (Self Represented)
Crown Solicitor (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2019/00079096
REASONS FOR DECISION
Summary
-
The applicant, Philip Charles Walker, seeks an administrative review pursuant to the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW) (GIPA Act) of the decision of the respondent, Roads and Maritime Services, made on 8 February 2019 that it holds no further documents relating to the design of the truck arrester bed in the Mona Vale Road East Upgrade Project (the Decision).
-
I am satisfied that the correct and preferable decision is that the respondent holds no further documents relating to the design of the truck arrester bed in the Mona Vale Road East Upgrade Project. Accordingly, I affirm the Decision.
Background
The respondent
-
At all relevant times the respondent has been an “agency” within the meaning of the GIPA Act.
The Mona Vale Road East Upgrade Project
-
The Mona Vale Road East and West Upgrade Projects are a series of works undertaken by the respondent, currently under construction, to widen Mona Vale Road from two to four lanes at particular points. These projects are intended to alleviate peak hour traffic on the road. The chronology for the Mona Vale Road East Upgrade Project, which includes the construction of a truck arrester bed, is set out in paragraphs [5] to [14] below.
-
On 11 February 2014, the respondent commenced design work. The initial design included a truck arrester bed located next to the eastbound lane approaching Walana Crescent, near the bottom of the steep decent on Mona Vale Road, adjacent to the Mona Vale General Cemetery. This is the previous location…
Continue reading Walker v Roads and Maritime Services
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Walker v Roads and Maritime Services [2019] NSWCATAD 177
- Case
- [2019] NSWCATAD 177
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the court were whether the respondent had conducted a sufficient search for relevant documents and whether the decision of the respondent, made on 8 February 2019, to assert that no further documents existed was justified. The court had to consider the principles of administrative review, particularly in relation to the adequacy of the search and the transparency of the decision-making process. Additionally, the court assessed whether the respondent's decision was rational and based on relevant considerations.
In its judgment, the court found that the respondent had undertaken a reasonable and thorough search for documents related to the truck arrester bed design. The court accepted that the respondent had considered all relevant sources and that its decision on 8 February 2019, stating that no further documents were held, was adequately supported by the evidence. The court emphasised the importance of ensuring that any search for information under the Government Information (Public Access) Act is comprehensive and that decisions regarding the disclosure of information are made transparently and in accordance with the law.
As a result of the court's findings, the decision of the respondent was affirmed. The court upheld the respondent's assertion that it held no further documents relating to the design of the truck arrester bed in the Mona Vale Road East Upgrade Project. The court found that the respondent's decision was lawful, and the applicant's application for an order to compel the disclosure of further information was dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
The decision of the respondent made on 8 February 2019 that it holds no further documents relating to the design of the truck arrester bed in the Mona Vale Road East Upgrade Project is affirmed.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.