Sunshine Coast Broadcasters Pty Ltd v The Australian Communications and Media Authority [2012] FCA 1205

Sunshine Coast Broadcasters Pty Ltd v The Australian Communications and Media Authority [2012] FCA 1205

The ACMA, in deciding not to propose a draft variation to the Nambour Licence Area Plan following a request, was not performing a function under s 26(2) of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, but rather an incidental function under the Australian Communications and Media Authority Act 2005. Therefore, the obligation to carry out wide public consultation did not arise. The ACMA's evaluation of the merits and application of policy did not constitute a reviewable failure to take into account relevant considerations, nor was its decision unreasonable or made without regard to merits. No grounds for judicial review were made out.

Parties
First Applicant: Sunshine Coast Broadcasters Pty Ltd; Second Applicant: Southern Cross Media Services Pty Ltd; Third Applicant: Southern Cross Media Australia Pty Ltd; Fourth Applicant: Southern Cross Media Australia Holdings Pty Ltd; Fifth Applicant: Southern Cross Media Group Ltd; Respondent: The Australian Communications and Media Authority
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review / Final Judgment Following Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Judicial Review, Administrative Decisions, Broadcasting Regulation, Public Consultation Requirements
Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Judicial Review Administrative Decisions Broadcasting Regulation Public Consultation Requirements

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 5 Authorities cited 40 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sunshine Coast Broadcasters Pty Ltd

First Applicant

Southern Cross Media Services Pty Ltd

Second Applicant

Southern Cross Media Australia Pty Ltd

Third Applicant

Southern Cross Media Australia Holdings Pty Ltd

Fourth Applicant

Southern Cross Media Group Ltd

Fifth Applicant

The Australian Communications and Media Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Judicial Review / Final Judgment Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether ACMA was required to undertake wide public consultation under s 27(1) of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 before deciding not to propose variation to the Nambour Licence Area Plan
  2. 2 Whether the decision of the ACMA was an exercise of a function under s 26(2) of the Act
  3. 3 Whether ACMA failed to take into account relevant considerations or took into account irrelevant considerations

Ratio Decidendi

The ACMA, in deciding not to propose a draft variation to the Nambour Licence Area Plan following a request, was not performing a function under s 26(2) of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, but rather an incidental function under the Australian Communications and Media Authority Act 2005. Therefore, the obligation to carry out wide public consultation did not arise. The ACMA's evaluation of the merits and application of policy did not constitute a reviewable failure to take into account relevant considerations, nor was its decision unreasonable or made without regard to merits. No grounds for judicial review were made out.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The applicants have leave to amend their amended application for an order of review in specified terms of pages 3–7 and paragraphs [6] and [7] on page 8 of their draft further amended application. Leave to amend is not otherwise granted.
  • The application is dismissed.