Civil and Administrative Tribunal
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Zonnevylle v Information Commissioner [2021] NSWCATAD 366 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 10 December 2021 Decision date: 10 December 2021 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: H J Dixon SC, Senior Member Decision: (1) An oral hearing of the application by the Information Commissioner of 1 November 2021 is dispensed with and the application be determined on the papers;
(2) The application by the Information Commissioner for the dismissal under section 55(1)(b) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) is granted
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – summary dismissal of proceedings under s. 55(1)(b) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 – whether application misconceived because no reviewable decision – whether application misconceived and vexatious
Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013; Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009; Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997; Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (Vic); Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA)
Cases Cited: Department of Education v Zonnevylle [2020] NSWCATAD 96; Long v Metramix Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCATAP 198; BDK v Department of Education and Communities [2015] NSWCATAP 129; NG v Chinese Medicine Board of Australia [2017] NSWCATOD 36; Samuel v Medical Council of New South Wales [2020] NSWCATOD 149; Fox v Commissioner of Police [2016] NSWCATAD 77; Cocks Macnish & Anor v Biundo [2004] WASCA 194
Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Peter Zonnevylle (Applicant)
Information Commissioner (Respondent)Representation: Applicant (Self Represented)
Crown Solicitor (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2021/247292 Publication restriction: Nil
Reasons for decision
-
In this matter the Information Commissioner seeks an order that the proceedings brought by Mr Peter Zonnevylle dated 3 September 2021 in which he seeks to invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal and then for the making of various orders against the Information Commissioner be dismissed pursuant to s. 55(1)(b) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (the CAT Act).
-
The Information Commissioner relies for the dismissal order on s. 55(1)(b) of the CAT Act on the grounds that the proceedings are misconceived, frivolous and vexatious.
Background
-
In Department of Education v Zonnevylle [2020] NSWCATAD 96 the Tribunal made an order pursuant to s. 110 of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (the GIPA Act) restraining Mr Zonnevylle, who in these reasons will be referred to as the applicant, from making applications for information from certain named agencies, including the Department of Education, without the Tribunal’s approval.
-
By application dated 19 May 2021, the applicant sought the Tribunal’s approval to make an application for information to the Department of Education. Both the Department and the Information Commissioner were notified of this application, which is the subject of Tribunal proceedings number 2021/00140934.
-
On 27 May 2021, the Information Commissioner wrote to the Tribunal to advise that she did not wish to exercise her right to appear and be heard in the Tribunal in those proceedings before the Tribunal. The Information Commissioner also indicated that if the Tribunal considers that the…
Continue reading Zonnevylle v Information Commissioner
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Zonnevylle v Information Commissioner [2021] NSWCATAD 366
- Case
- [2021] NSWCATAD 366
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the court were whether the application by the Information Commissioner was misconceived due to the absence of a reviewable decision and whether the application itself was misconceived and vexatious. The court was required to determine if the application could proceed and if it was appropriate to dismiss the proceedings summarily.
The court found that the application was not misconceived as there was indeed a reviewable decision at the core of the proceedings. Furthermore, the court held that the application by the Information Commissioner was neither misconceived nor vexatious. The court reasoned that the Information Commissioner had a legitimate interest in ensuring that proceedings before the CAT were founded on proper legal grounds. Consequently, the application for summary dismissal was granted, and the proceedings were dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) An oral hearing of the application by the Information Commissioner of 1 November 2021 is dispensed with and the application be determined on the papers;
(2) The application by the Information Commissioner for the dismissal under section 55(1)(b) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) is granted
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.