Grande v Lismore City Council [2024] NSWCATAD 33

Grande v Lismore City Council [2024] NSWCATAD 33

The agency did not establish, with sufficient particularity, how disclosure of the information in categories 1 to 13 would prejudice any person’s legitimate business, commercial, professional or financial interests; public interest in disclosure outweighs the asserted interests against disclosure. Information in categories 14 to 16 may potentially engage the public interest against disclosure, but the agency failed to provide sufficient material to allow the Tribunal to balance competing considerations; these are remitted for reconsideration. Certain limited personal information (telephone numbers) may properly be redacted on public interest grounds.

Parties
Applicant: Nicholas Grande; Respondent: Lismore City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Final Decision
Outcome
Agency's decision set aside in part and remitted for reconsideration in part
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Review of Government Decisions, Public Interest Test, Disclosure Exemptions, Business Confidentiality
Administrative Law Information Rights Freedom of Information Review of Government Decisions Public Interest Test Disclosure Exemptions Business Confidentiality

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicholas Grande

Applicant

Lismore City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the agency's refusal to provide access to certain government information is justified under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW) due to overriding public interest against disclosure, particularly relating to business, commercial, or personal information.

Ratio Decidendi

The agency did not establish, with sufficient particularity, how disclosure of the information in categories 1 to 13 would prejudice any person’s legitimate business, commercial, professional or financial interests; public interest in disclosure outweighs the asserted interests against disclosure. Information in categories 14 to 16 may potentially engage the public interest against disclosure, but the agency failed to provide sufficient material to allow the Tribunal to balance competing considerations; these are remitted for reconsideration. Certain limited personal information (telephone numbers) may properly be redacted on public interest grounds.

Court Disposition

Agency's decision set aside in part and remitted for reconsideration in part

Orders

  • The agency's decision to refuse access to government information is set aside.
  • Access to information in categories 1 to 13 to be provided by 1 March 2024, subject to redaction of names and signatures of Donnelly personnel, and personal telephone numbers of neighbours and their contact persons.