Cerminara -v- Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service Anor [2001] NSWADT 95

Cerminara -v- Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service Anor [2001] NSWADT 95

The Tribunal affirmed the refusal of access because each subject document plainly contained matter whose disclosure could reasonably be expected to identify confidential sources in relation to enforcement or administration of the criminal law, endanger the life or physical safety of persons identified in the documents, and might well prejudice the effectiveness of lawful methods or procedures for dealing with contraventions or possible contraventions of the law. The documents were restricted documents, the relevant information was confidential and related to potentially criminal matters, and release was not warranted under the section 25(1) discretion; the whole of the documents was...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of a Reviewable Decision Under the Freedom of Information Act 1989 Refusing Access to Documents / Principal Matter
Outcome
The decision under review is affirmed.
Legal Topics
['access to Documents' 'exempt Documents' 'restricted Documents' 'law Enforcement and Public Safety' 'confidential Sources of Information' 'section 25(1) Discretion']
['freedom of Information' 'administrative Law'] ['access to Documents' 'exempt Documents' 'restricted Documents' 'law Enforcement and Public Safety' 'confidential Sources of Information' 'section 25(1) Discretion']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Review of a Reviewable Decision Under the Freedom of Information Act 1989 Refusing Access to Documents / Principal Matter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether eight NSW Police Service documents concerning or relating to the applicant were exempt documents under clause 4(1)(b), (c) and (e) of Schedule 1 to the Freedom of Information Act 1989.' 'Whether disclosure could reasonably be expected to enable the existence or identity of confidential sources of information to be ascertained, endanger life or physical safety, or prejudice lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating or dealing with contraventions of the law.' 'Whether the Tribunal should release the documents in any event under the section 25(1) discretion.' 'Whether exempt matter could appropriately be deleted under section 24(4) of the Freedom of Information Act 1989.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal affirmed the refusal of access because each subject document plainly contained matter whose disclosure could reasonably be expected to identify confidential sources in relation to enforcement or administration of the criminal law, endanger the life or physical safety of persons identified in the documents, and might well prejudice the effectiveness of lawful methods or procedures for dealing with contraventions or possible contraventions of the law. The documents were restricted documents, the relevant information was confidential and related to potentially criminal matters, and release was not warranted under the section 25(1) discretion; the whole of the documents was...

Court Disposition

The decision under review is affirmed.

Orders

  • ['The decision under review is affirmed.']