CHU Underwriting Pty Ltd v Hunter Water Corporation [2018] NSWCATAD 273

CHU Underwriting Pty Ltd v Hunter Water Corporation [2018] NSWCATAD 273

The respondent did not establish legal professional privilege over the Investigation Report, specified emails and photographs, the Major Investigation Report, and the email authored by J Wynn because the evidence and content did not show that those documents were brought into existence for the dominant purpose of legal advice or professional legal services; some appeared operational, investigative, public-view photographs, or addressed to technical personnel. However, six remaining documents, being four file notes and two emails from I. Hiles with attached reports, were privileged because they appeared to have been brought into existence for the purpose of providing material so that legal...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Administrative Review of a Decision Concerning Access to Government Information Under the Government Information (public Access) Act 2009 / Determined on the Papers
Outcome
The respondent's decision was set aside in part and otherwise affirmed.
Legal Topics
['government Information Access' 'government Information (public Access) Act 2009' 'legal Professional Privilege' 'client Legal Privilege' 'conclusive Presumption Against Disclosure' 'sufficiency of Searches']
['administrative Law'] ['government Information Access' 'government Information (public Access) Act 2009' 'legal Professional Privilege' 'client Legal Privilege' 'conclusive Presumption Against Disclosure' 'sufficiency of Searches']

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 Administrative Review of a Decision Concerning Access to Government Information Under the Government Information (public Access) Act 2009 / Determined on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the withheld documents attracted legal professional privilege so as to give rise to a conclusive presumption of an overriding public interest against disclosure under Sch 1 cl 5 of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009.' 'Whether the respondent had established that the documents were brought into existence for the dominant purpose of legal advice or professional legal services in relation to existing or contemplated litigation.']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent did not establish legal professional privilege over the Investigation Report, specified emails and photographs, the Major Investigation Report, and the email authored by J Wynn because the evidence and content did not show that those documents were brought into existence for the dominant purpose of legal advice or professional legal services; some appeared operational, investigative, public-view photographs, or addressed to technical personnel. However, six remaining documents, being four file notes and two emails from I. Hiles with attached reports, were privileged because they appeared to have been brought into existence for the purpose of providing material so that legal...

Court Disposition

The respondent's decision was set aside in part and otherwise affirmed.

Orders

  • ['The decision of the respondent is set aside in part.' 'The Investigation Report as identified at [42] of these reasons is to be released to the applicant 28 days after publication of these reasons.' 'The three emails and their attachments as identified at [49] of these reasons is to be released to the applicant 28...