Young, B.N. v Wicks, N.F. [1986] FCA 339

Young, B.N. v Wicks, N.F. [1986] FCA 339

The subject documents (documents described in second confidential appendix) are exempt documents under s.38 of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 by reason of r.283(1) Air Navigation Regulations. They are not exempt under s.41(1) or s.43(1)(c)(i). Access to documents 1 to 36 inclusive is not permitted due to s.12(2), as access is not reasonably necessary for proper understanding of later documents. The third request was valid under s.15(1), being reasonably construed as a request for documents.

Parties
Applicant: Beryl Norah Young; Respondent: N.F. Wicks
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 May 1986
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application partly allowed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Exemption of Documents, Government Records, Judicial Review
Administrative Law Freedom of Information Exemption of Documents Government Records Judicial Review

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Beryl Norah Young

Applicant

N.F. Wicks

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Effect of s.12(2) Freedom of Information Act 1982 and 'proper understanding'
  2. 2 Whether documents are exempt under s.41(1) as relating to 'personal affairs'
  3. 3 Whether documents are exempt under s.43(1)(c)(i) as relating to 'business or professional affairs'

Ratio Decidendi

The subject documents (documents described in second confidential appendix) are exempt documents under s.38 of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 by reason of r.283(1) Air Navigation Regulations. They are not exempt under s.41(1) or s.43(1)(c)(i). Access to documents 1 to 36 inclusive is not permitted due to s.12(2), as access is not reasonably necessary for proper understanding of later documents. The third request was valid under s.15(1), being reasonably construed as a request for documents.

Court Disposition

Application partly allowed

Orders

  • Until further order, publication of confidential appendices restricted to parties and their advisers.
  • Declare that, by reason of s.12(2) Freedom of Information Act 1982, a person is not entitled to obtain access to documents Nos. 1 to 36 inclusive mentioned in the second confidential appendix.