Donnellan v Ku-ring-gai Council [2013] NSWADT 115

Donnellan v Ku-ring-gai Council [2013] NSWADT 115

The email addresses and specified parts of emails were personal information and there was an overriding public interest against their disclosure, but the substance of the remaining disputed emails concerned responses to and issues about a development application rather than personal information about the objectors....

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Decision on Access to Government Information Under the Government Information (public Access) Act 2009 / On the Papers; Joined Applications for Review
Outcome
Decision of the respondent affirmed subject to additional deletions; temporary non-disclosure order made for material marked not to be published.
Legal Topics
['public Interest Test Under the Government Information (public Access) Act 2009' 'personal Information' 'open Access Information' 'development Application Submissions' 'third Party Objections to Disclosure' 'publication Restriction']
['administrative Law' 'government Information and Public Access' 'privacy' 'local Government and Development Applications'] ['public Interest Test Under the Government Information (public Access) Act 2009' 'personal Information' 'open Access Information' 'development Application Submissions' 'third Party Objections to Disclosure' 'publication Restriction']

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

Administrative Review of Decision on Access to Government Information Under the Government Information (public Access) Act 2009 / On the Papers; Joined Applications for Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether information in emails concerning a development application was personal information for the purposes of item 3(a) of the table to s 14(2) of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009.' 'Whether disclosure of the disputed emails could reasonably be expected to prejudice court proceedings by revealing matter prepared for current or future proceedings under item 3(c) of the table to s 14(2) of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009.' 'Whether disclosure could reasonably be expected to undermine competitive neutrality or endanger or prejudice a system or procedure for protecting the environment.' 'Whether disclosure could reasonably be expected to prejudice legitimate financial interests.' 'Whether, on balance, public interest considerations against disclosure outweighed the public interest considerations in favour of disclosure.']

Ratio Decidendi

The email addresses and specified parts of emails were personal information and there was an overriding public interest against their disclosure, but the substance of the remaining disputed emails concerned responses to and issues about a development application rather than personal information about the objectors. The objectors failed to establish that disclosure could reasonably be expected to prejudice court proceedings, undermine competitive neutrality, endanger or prejudice environmental protection systems or procedures, or prejudice legitimate financial interests. Given the strong public interest in disclosure of development application material and in government accountability, the...

Court Disposition

Decision of the respondent affirmed subject to additional deletions; temporary non-disclosure order made for material marked not to be published.

Orders

  • ['Subject to the following additional deletions from the information in the emails, the subject of this application, the decision of the respondent is affirmed: (a) deletion of the information that is an email address of a person other than an officer or representatives of the respondent; (b) deletion of the...