Webb v Port Stephens Council

Case [2022] NSWCATAD 404


Civil and Administrative Tribunal


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Webb v Port Stephens Council [2022] NSWCATAD 404
Hearing dates: 31 October 2022
Date of orders: 20 December 2022
Decision date: 20 December 2022
Jurisdiction:Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before: J Levine, Senior Member
Decision:

(1) The Decision under review is affirmed.

(2) Pursuant to section 64 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), disclosure of the material filed by the Respondent on a confidential basis is prohibited. That material is not to be released to the Applicant or the public.

Catchwords:

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – access to government information – interested party – request for access to portions of documents – whether disclosure would reveal personal information – whether disclosure would undermine competitive neutrality of an agency or place it at a disadvantage in any market – whether disclosure would diminish competitive commercial value of information – whether disclosure would prejudice a person’s legitimate business, commercial, professional or financial interests – whether form of access requested would involve an infringement of copyright

Legislation Cited:

Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW)

Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)

Copyright Act 1968 (Cth)

Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW)

Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

Amos v Central Coast Council [2018] NSWCATAD 101

CH Real Estate Pty Limited (t/a Raine & Horne Commercial, Penrith) v Penrith City Council [2005] NSWADT 147

Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force v Camilleri [2012] NSWADTAP 19

Elf Farm Supplies Pty Ltd v Department of Planning and Environment [2018] NSWCATAD 277

Fisher v Goulburn Mulwaree Council [2019] NSWCATAD 34

Hurst v Wagga Wagga City Council [2011] NSWADT 307

Leech v Sydney Water Corporation [2010] NSWADT 298

McKinnon v Blacktown City Council [2012] NSWADT 44

Sandy v Kiama Municipal Council [2019] NSWCATAD 49

Transport for NSW v Searle [2018] NSWCATAP 93

YG and GG v Minister for Community Services [2002] NSWCA 247

Texts Cited:

Information and Privacy Commission New South Wales, “Fact Sheet – The GIPA Act and Copyright” (2019)

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Telina Webb (Applicant)
Port Stephens Council (Respondent)
Also heard:
Crown Solicitor (see s104(1), Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009)
Representation: Applicant (Self Represented)
Lindsay Taylor Lawyers (Respondent)
Crown Solicitor (Self Represented)
File Number(s): 2022/00138219
Publication restriction: Pursuant to section 64 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), disclosure of the material filed by the Respondent on a confidential basis is prohibited. That material is not to be released to either the Applicant or the public.

REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction

  1. Ms Telina Webb (“Applicant”) has applied to the New South Wales Civil and Appeals Tribunal (“Tribunal” or “NCAT”) for administrative review of a decision made on 6 January 2022 (“Decision”) by the Port Stephens Council (“Council” or “Respondent”) under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (“GIPA Act”) refusing her access to some of the information she had requested on 17 November 2021 (“Access Application”).

  2. The Access Application was for six categories of…

Continue reading Webb v Port Stephens Council

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Webb v Port Stephens Council [2022] NSWCATAD 404
Case
[2022] NSWCATAD 404
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Webb v Port Stephens Council was a case before the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales. The dispute centred around the applicant's request for access to certain documents held by the respondent, Port Stephens Council. The applicant, Webb, sought to access specific portions of documents that were withheld under the Information and Privacy Commission Act 2009 (NSW) and the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW). Webb argued that the Council had wrongfully withheld information that was pertinent to a business interest and public concern.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the disclosure of the requested information would reveal personal information, undermine the competitive neutrality of the Council, diminish the commercial value of the information, prejudice the applicant's legitimate business interests, or infringe on copyright. The court had to balance the public's right to access information against the statutory exemptions and exceptions that justified withholding such information.

In determining the matter, the court examined the specific exemptions and exceptions relevant to the withheld information. It found that the requested information, if disclosed, would have compromised the privacy of individuals and could potentially harm the Council's competitive position and commercial interests. The court was satisfied that the respondent had correctly applied the relevant legislative provisions in withholding the information. Consequently, the tribunal affirmed the decision of the Council not to disclose the requested material. Additionally, under section 64 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), the court prohibited the disclosure of the material filed by the respondent on a confidential basis, ensuring it was not released to the applicant or the public.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) The Decision under review is affirmed.

(2) Pursuant to section 64 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), disclosure of the material filed by the Respondent on a confidential basis is prohibited. That material is not to be released to the Applicant or the public.

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.