ZLCH and Department of Veterans’ Affairs (Freedom of information)

This matter concerned an application for review to the Tribunal by an applicant, ZLCH, against the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (the Respondent). The applicant, a former member of the Australian Defence Force, sought access to personal and case file information, including documents relating to previous adverse decisions made by the department. The applicant's initial request was broad, but was subsequently revised following consultation with the Respondent under section 24AB of the *Freedom of Information Act 1982* (Cth) (the FOI Act), on the basis that processing the original request would substantially and unreasonably divert the Respondent's resources.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Respondent had taken all reasonable steps to find the documents requested by the applicant, as required by section 24A of the FOI Act. This involved considering whether any further documents that might exist were in the Respondent's possession but could not be found, or did not exist at all. The applicant contended that reasonable steps had not been taken, specifically arguing for further IT searches (both internal and external) and consultation with specific staff members who had been involved in earlier decision-making processes.

The Tribunal applied the established principle that "reasonable steps" under section 24A are those that are not extravagant or excessive, but are moderate and appropriate to the circumstances. The Tribunal acknowledged the applicant's efforts to narrow the scope of his request and noted that the applicant had identified instances where documents previously stated as not found were later located. However, the Tribunal found that the Respondent had demonstrated genuine attempts to locate the requested documents, including during a remitted internal review process. The Tribunal concluded that the Respondent was not required to find every single document, but rather to have taken all reasonable steps to do so, and that the steps taken were sufficient in this regard, considering factors such as legacy system issues and the extended timeframe of the documents.

Accordingly, the Tribunal found that the Respondent had undertaken all reasonable steps to find the documents sought by the applicant, and that any further documents that might exist either could not be found or did not exist. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.