O’Grady v Sutherland Shire Council [2018] NSWCATAD 253

O’Grady v Sutherland Shire Council [2018] NSWCATAD 253

Because the respondent had released all outstanding information, there was no substantive access issue remaining for the Tribunal to decide and the applicant was not seeking any review function that the Tribunal could perform. The respondent's reconsideration and release of information after receiving the applicant's submissions, together with reimbursement of the filing fee and the absence of evidence of further recoverable costs, did not constitute special circumstances warranting costs. No material supported actual or apprehended bias. The remaining proceedings were therefore misconceived and lacking in substance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of a Government Information Access Decision Under the Government Information (public Access) Act 2009 / Proceedings Dismissed as Misconceived and Lacking in Substance; Applicant's Costs Application Dismissed
Outcome
Proceedings dismissed; applicant's application for costs dismissed.
Legal Topics
['government Information Access' 'tribunal Jurisdiction' 'misconceived or Lacking in Substance Proceedings' 'special Circumstances for Costs' 'bias']
['administrative Law' 'government Information' 'costs'] ['government Information Access' 'tribunal Jurisdiction' 'misconceived or Lacking in Substance Proceedings' 'special Circumstances for Costs' 'bias']

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

Administrative Review of a Government Information Access Decision Under the Government Information (public Access) Act 2009 / Proceedings Dismissed as Misconceived and Lacking in Substance; Applicant's Costs Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether any substantive issue remained for Tribunal review after the respondent released all outstanding information sought by the applicant.' "Whether the Tribunal could review the respondent's conduct in dealing with the access application rather than determine the correct and preferable decision." 'Whether special circumstances warranted an award of costs to the applicant under s 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.' "Whether the respondent's decisions were affected by actual or apprehended bias."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the respondent had released all outstanding information, there was no substantive access issue remaining for the Tribunal to decide and the applicant was not seeking any review function that the Tribunal could perform. The respondent's reconsideration and release of information after receiving the applicant's submissions, together with reimbursement of the filing fee and the absence of evidence of further recoverable costs, did not constitute special circumstances warranting costs. No material supported actual or apprehended bias. The remaining proceedings were therefore misconceived and lacking in substance.

Court Disposition

Proceedings dismissed; applicant's application for costs dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The proceedings are dismissed under s 55(1)(b) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 for being misconceived and lacking in substance.' "The applicant's application for costs is dismissed."]