Leech v Sydney Water Corporation [2010] NSWADT 298

Leech v Sydney Water Corporation [2010] NSWADT 298

Although the documents concerned SYC's business affairs and information about SYC's pricing structure could have an unreasonable adverse effect if disclosed, SYC did not provide evidence establishing more than a mere possibility that release of the remaining documents in redacted form would adversely and unreasonably affect its business. The correct and preferable decision was to remit the matter for reconsideration with the recommended redactions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Review of Freedom of Information Act 1989 Access Determination / Hearing and Written Reasons After Extempore Decision
Outcome
Sydney Water's determination was set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration with a recommendation that the documents be released in redacted form.
Legal Topics
['access to Documents' 'business Affairs Exemption' 'redaction of Documents' 'unreasonable Adverse Effect on Business Affairs']
['administrative Law' 'freedom of Information'] ['access to Documents' 'business Affairs Exemption' 'redaction of Documents' 'unreasonable Adverse Effect on Business Affairs']

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

Review of Freedom of Information Act 1989 Access Determination / Hearing and Written Reasons After Extempore Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the documents contained information concerning the business, professional, commercial or financial affairs of Steve Yang Constructions Pty Ltd.' 'Whether disclosure of the documents could reasonably be expected to have an unreasonable adverse effect on those business affairs under clause 7(1)(c) of Schedule 1 to the Freedom of Information Act 1989.' 'Whether documents should be released in redacted form, including removal of identifying information and price structure information.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the documents concerned SYC's business affairs and information about SYC's pricing structure could have an unreasonable adverse effect if disclosed, SYC did not provide evidence establishing more than a mere possibility that release of the remaining documents in redacted form would adversely and unreasonably affect its business. The correct and preferable decision was to remit the matter for reconsideration with the recommended redactions.

Court Disposition

Sydney Water's determination was set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration with a recommendation that the documents be released in redacted form.

Orders

  • ['The matter is remitted for re-consideration by Sydney Water pursuant to section 63(3)(d) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 with the recommendation that documents be released in a redacted form.' 'The information referred to at paragraph [23] of these reasons should be removed from the documents...