Amos v Central Coast Council [2018] NSWCATAD 101

Amos v Central Coast Council [2018] NSWCATAD 101

The Tribunal found that providing copy access to the reports would involve an infringement of copyright under s 72(2)(c) of the GIPA Act, as the Council's purpose in copying would not fall within the fair dealing exception. The Tribunal held it does have power to review an implied decision by the Council that it...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of Administrative Decision / Final Decision With Orders
Outcome
Partly remitted for reconsideration; decision on form of access affirmed
Legal Topics
['government Information Access' 'freedom of Information' 'forms of Access to Information' 'copyright Infringement' 'sufficiency of Agency Searches' 'jurisdiction of Tribunal' 'open Access Information']
['administrative Law' 'copyright Law' 'information Law'] ['government Information Access' 'freedom of Information' 'forms of Access to Information' 'copyright Infringement' 'sufficiency of Agency Searches' 'jurisdiction of Tribunal' 'open Access Information']

Source-derived case record

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 Administrative Decision / Final Decision With Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether provision of copy access to reports would involve an infringement of copyright under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth)' "Whether the Tribunal may review the sufficiency of the agency's searches, including review of an implied decision that the agency does not hold information" 'Whether fair dealing exceptions under copyright law allow the Council to provide copy access' "Whether the Council's decision to provide inspection-only access is the correct and preferable decision"]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that providing copy access to the reports would involve an infringement of copyright under s 72(2)(c) of the GIPA Act, as the Council's purpose in copying would not fall within the fair dealing exception. The Tribunal held it does have power to review an implied decision by the Council that it does not hold any further information responsive to the applicants' request, and that the Council had not discharged its onus to establish all relevant information had been identified; the matter should be remitted to the Council for reconsideration of this implied decision.

Court Disposition

Partly remitted for reconsideration; decision on form of access affirmed

Orders

  • ['The implied decision that respondent does not hold any information is remitted for reconsideration under s 65 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997.' 'The respondent is to affirm, vary, or set aside and substitute the decision, and provide reasons to both applicants and Tribunal by 5 June 2018.'...