Cianfrano v Director General, Premier's Department [2006] NSWADT 137

Cianfrano v Director General, Premier's Department [2006] NSWADT 137

The applicant's revised FOI request remained a broad global request without meaningful narrowing. On the accepted evidence, processing at least 11,400 pages would require about 229.5 hours and might exceed that estimate because further file parts remained to be assessed. Having regard to the breadth of the request, limited cooperation in narrowing it, statutory timeframes, the scale of officer time required, and the possibility that the estimate would be exceeded, the Tribunal was satisfied that dealing with the request would substantially and unreasonably divert the Premier's Department's resources within s 25(1)(a1).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of an FOI Determination Refusing Access on the Ground of Substantial and Unreasonable Diversion of Agency Resources / Principal Matter; Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed; determination under review affirmed.
Legal Topics
['access to Documents' 'substantial and Unreasonable Diversion of Agency Resources' 'voluminous FOI Requests' 'agency Obligation to Assist Applicant to Amend Request']
['administrative Law' 'freedom of Information'] ['access to Documents' 'substantial and Unreasonable Diversion of Agency Resources' 'voluminous FOI Requests' 'agency Obligation to Assist Applicant to Amend Request']

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 an FOI Determination Refusing Access on the Ground of Substantial and Unreasonable Diversion of Agency Resources / Principal Matter; Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the work involved in dealing with the applicant's FOI request would substantially and unreasonably divert the agency's resources away from their use in the exercise of its functions under s 25(1)(a1) of the Freedom of Information Act 1989." 'Whether the agency had discharged its onus under s 61 of the Freedom of Information Act 1989 to establish that its determination was justified.' 'Whether steps beyond search and retrieval, including perusal of documents, preparation of a schedule, consultation and copying, could be considered in assessing resource diversion.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's revised FOI request remained a broad global request without meaningful narrowing. On the accepted evidence, processing at least 11,400 pages would require about 229.5 hours and might exceed that estimate because further file parts remained to be assessed. Having regard to the breadth of the request, limited cooperation in narrowing it, statutory timeframes, the scale of officer time required, and the possibility that the estimate would be exceeded, the Tribunal was satisfied that dealing with the request would substantially and unreasonably divert the Premier's Department's resources within s 25(1)(a1).

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; determination under review affirmed.

Orders

  • ['Application dismissed.' 'Determination under review affirmed.']