‘ATN’ and Department of Infrastructure,
Transport, Regional Development,
Communications and the Arts (Freedom of
information) [2025] AICmr 17 (23 January 2025)
Decision and reasons for decision of
Justin Lodge, Acting General Manager, FOI Case Management
Delegate of the Australian Information Commissioner for the purposes of s 55K of the
Freedom of Information Act 1982
Applicant
‘ATN’
Respondent
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional
Development, Communications and the Arts
Third Party
Activision Blizzard Pty Ltd
Decision date
23 January 2025
Reference
MR21/00069
Catchwords
Freedom of Information — Whether material irrelevant to
request — Whether disclosure of personal information
unreasonable — Whether disclosure would unreasonably affect
an organisation in respect of its lawful business affairs —
Whether contrary to public interest to release conditionally
exempt documents — (CTH)
Freedom of Information Act 1982 ss
11A, 22, 47F and 47G
Decision
1. Under s 55K of the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act), I affirm the decision
of the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development,
Communications and the Arts (the Department) of 1 February 2021, as varied on 23
August 2024.
1
oaic.gov.au
Key points
2. This decision discusses the application of s 47F to material comprising the names of
various individuals appearing in documents relating to an application by a third party
entity for classification of a video game to the Classification Board. It also considers
the application of s 47G to a code name that is referenced in the classification
application. It is primarily of interest to the parties in relation to the specific
documents sought.
Reasons for decision
Scope of IC review
3. The applicant applied to the Department for access to the following documents
relating to the video game titled ‘Call of Duty Black Ops Cold War’:
• Classifier note
• Decision document
• Application for classification and its supporting material
• Screenshot showing information from the database as seen by the
Classification Board
• Email and its attachment to and/or from the classification applicant,
Classification Board, distributor, publisher and developer
• Form and its attachment to and/or from the classification applicant,
Classification Board, distributor, publisher and developer.
4. On 30 November 2020, the Department identified 36 documents relevant to the
applicant’s request and decided to grant partial access to those documents. In making
its decision, the Department relied on the personal privacy exemption (s 47F) and the
business affairs exemption (s 47G) of the FOI Act. The Department also found that
some material was irrelevant to the scope of the applicant’s request, and deleted this
material under s 22 of the FOI Act.
5. On 23 August 2024, the Department made a revised decision under s 55G of the FOI Act
and provided the applicant with further parts of the documents. The Department
relied on the management functions of an agency exemption (s 47E(c)) of the FOI Act,
as well as the exemptions under ss 47F and 47G. The Department also deleted
irrelevant material under s 22.
6. Accordingly, the issues to be decided in this Information Commissioner review (IC
review) are whether:
• the material that the Department found to be irrelevant to the scope of the
applicant’s request is irrelevant, and
• the material that the Department found to be conditionally exempt under
ss 47E(c), 47F and 47G is conditionally exempt under any of these provisions,
and if so, whether giving the applicant access to the conditionally exempt
material at this time would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest
(s 11A(5)).
2
oaic.gov.au
link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 3
7. In an IC review of an access refusal decision, the agency bears the onus of establishing
that its decision is justified or that I should give a decision adverse to the applican
t.1
8. In making my decision, I have had regard to the following:
• the Department’s decision and reasons for decision of 1 February 2021
• the Department’s revised decision and reasons for decision of 23 August 2024
• the documents at issue
• the FOI
Act2
• the Guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner under s 93A
of the FOI
Act3 to which agencies must have regard in performing a function or
exercising a power under the FOI
Act,4 and
• the parties’ submissions.
Irrelevant information (s 22)
9. In their correspondence to the Department, the applicant clarified that they did not
agree that names and contact details of agency staff below Senior Executive Service
(SES) level could be considered irrelevant to the scope of the request. However, the
applicant confirmed that with respect to personal information appearing in the
documents, they would like the Department to ‘keep the country code of the phone
number, first 6 digits (or the [Bank Identification Number]) of the credit card number,
and only remove the username of the email address’.
10. In its revised decision, the Department explained that the information it had removed
comprises the information that the applicant had confirmed to be outside the scope of
their request.
11. The Department also advised the name of the staff member who had printed the
documents appears at the top right hand corner of each document. The Department
explained that the name of the individual only appears within the documents as a
result of an administrative function, and that the name was generated after the
applicant’s request was received.
12. Additionally, the Department explained that some of the material in the documents
relate to other titles being considered by the Classification Board at the same time as
the video game that was referenced in the applicant’s request. The Department
explained that these titles and the information associated with them do not relate to
the applicant’s request.
13. I have examined the documents and based on my consideration of the Department’s
contentions with respect to the material that it redacted under s 22, I accept the
Department’s characterisation of this material. It is apparent that this material has
been expressly excluded by the applicant or is not relevant to the subject matter of the
applicant’s request.
1 FOI Act s 55D(1).
2 Sections 11A, 11B, and 47F set out in Annexure A.
3 See, Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
, Guidelines issued by the Australian Information
Commissioner under s 93A of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Guidelines).
4 Set out in Annexure A.
3
oaic.gov.au
link to page 4 link to page 4
14. Accordingly, I am satisfied that the information that the Department withheld under
s 22 would reasonably be regarded as irrelevant to the applicant’s request, and it is
not apparent that the applicant would decline access to a copy of the documents with
this material redacted.
Finding
15. The material that the Department withheld under s 22 is irrelevant to the applicant’s
request.
Personal privacy exemption (s 47F)
16. The Department found that some of the information in the documents comprise the
personal information of various individuals and that this material is conditionally
exempt under s 47F of the FOI Act.
17. A document or material will be exempt under this conditional exemption if it contains
‘personal information’, disclosure in response to the applicant’s FOI request would be
‘unreasonable’ (s 47F(1)), and it would be ‘contrary to the public interest’ to release
the material at the time of the decision (s 11A(5)).
18. The FOI Guidelines relevantly state that the test of ‘unreasonableness’ in s 47F of the
FOI Act ‘implies a need to balance the public interest in disclosure of government-held
information and the private interest in the privacy of individuals’
.5
Whether the documents contain personal information
19. ‘Personal information’ under the FOI Act has the same meaning as the equivalent term
in the
Privacy Act 1988.6 That definition is set out in Annexure A.
20. The relevant information comprises the names and signatures of various individuals.
Accordingly, I find that this material constitutes ‘personal information’ for the purpose
of s 47F(1) of the FOI Act.
Whether disclosure would involve an unreasonable disclosure of personal
information
21. The Department contends that disclosure of the personal information would
constitute an unreasonable disclosure of personal information for the following
reasons:
• the personal information is not well known
• the individuals to whom the personal information relates is not known to be
(or to have been) associated with the matters dealt with in the documents
• the personal information is not available from publicly accessible sources
• no further public purpose would be achieved through the release of the
personal information, particularly in circumstances where the personal
information is included in the documents as a result of their employment, and
arises from the administrative nature of their duties
5 FOI Guidelines, at [6.133].
6
Privacy Act 1988 s 6(1) (definition of ‘personal information’).
4
oaic.gov.au
• the individuals concerned had no authority to make decisions relating to the
classification of the video game that is the subject of the applicant’s request
• the individuals concerned would not expect the information to be placed in
the public domain, and detriment may be caused to the individuals to whom
the information relates, and
• the FOI Act does not control or restrict any subsequent use or dissemination of
information released under the FOI Act.
22. The Department further explained that its Classification Branch provides
administrative support to the Classification Board, and that the work undertaken by
the Board can, at times, be divisive. The Department states that there have previously
been real instances of staff being threatened, harassed and intimidated by members
of the public. On this basis, the Department contends that disclosure of the personal
information of staff within the Classification Branch may pose a risk to the health and
safety of those staff.
23. The applicant did not make any submissions that addressed the Department’s
application of the conditional exemption in s 47F.
24. Based on my examination of the documents and the Department’s submissions, I am
satisfied that disclosure of the personal information would constitute an unreasonable
disclosure of personal information. In particular, I accept the Department’s contention
that the personal information contained in the documents are not well known or
available from publicly accessible sources. The fact that disclosure under the FOI Act is
to the world at large is also a relevant consideration, particularly given the
Department’s contention that decisions made by the Classification Board may at times
be controversial, and that there have previously been instances where staff members
within the Classification Branch were threatened, harassed and intimidated by
members of the public.
25. Further, given the substance of the documents has largely already been disclosed to
the applicant, I do not consider the public interest in government transparency and
integrity as it relates to the personal information to be particularly strong. The
disclosure of the names and signatures of the individuals would not, in my view,
provide any demonstrable relevance to the affairs of government, particularly where
the individuals in question held no decision-making authority with respect to the
classification of the video game that is the subject of the applicant’s request.
26. In light of these considerations, I accept the Department’s contention that disclosure
of the personal information would involve an unreasonable disclosure of personal
information.
Finding (s 47F)
27. I am satisfied that the relevant material comprising the names and signatures of
various individuals is conditionally exempt under s 47F of the FOI Act.
28. The Department also found that some of the names of individuals are also
conditionally exempt under s 47E(c).
29. As I have found that this material is conditionally exempt under s 47F, it is unnecessary
for me to consider whether the names are also conditionally exempt under s 47E(c).
5
oaic.gov.au
link to page 6
Business affairs exemption (s 47G)
30. In its revised decision, the Department found that the conditional exemption in s 47G
applies to parts of the documents.
31. A document is conditionally exempt if it discloses information concerning the
business, commercial or financial affairs of an organisation or undertaking (business
information), where the disclosure of the business information would, or could
reasonably be expected to unreasonably affect the organisation adversely in respect
of its lawful business, commercial or financial affairs (s 47G(1)(a)).
32. Similarly, a document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure would or could
reasonably be expected to prejudice the future supply of information to the
Commonwealth, or an agency for the purpose of the administration of a law or
matters administered by an agency (s 47G(1)(b)).
33. If the business information is found to be conditionally exempt, it must nevertheless
be released unless its disclosure would be contrary to the public interest (s 11A(5)).
Whether the information comprises business information
34. The term ‘business or professional affairs’ in s 47G has been discussed in the FOI
Guidelines to mean ‘the totality of the money-making affairs of an organisation or
undertaking as distinct from its private or internal affairs
’.7
35. The Department explained that it had withheld access to information that is relevant
to the business, commercial or financial affairs of a third party entity, which comprises
a single code name used by the third party entity in their application to the
Classification Board for classification of the video game.
36. The Department further explained that it had undertaken consultations with the third
party entity, and they advised that code names are routinely used by the third party
entity and other organisations to identify individual games internally and in
confidential settings both prior to and after the launch of the titles.
37. I have considered the third party entity’s explanation together with the relevant
material, and I am satisfied that the information that the Department withheld under
s 47G relates to the money-making affairs of the third party entity, and is therefore
their business information.
Whether disclosure would have an unreasonable adverse effect on the third
party entity’s business affairs (s 47G(1)(a))
38. When considering the question as to whether disclosure of a document would have an
unreasonable adverse effect on an organisation’s business affairs, there is a need to
balance the public interest against the private interests of the organisation.
39. In its revised decision, the Department relied on submissions obtained during its
consultation with the third party entity. The submissions have been provided to the
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner for the purpose of this IC review. In
summary, the third party entity submits:
• code names operate as surrogate game titles prior to the announcement of the
title and existence of a particular game
7 FOI Guidelines at [6.191]-[6.195].
6
oaic.gov.au
• code names are often themed depending on a particular franchise, and the
disclosure of one code name could lead to other code names being discovered, or
speculated on
• release of the information could reasonably be expected to give actors with
malicious intent who seek to gain unauthorised access to the third party entity’s
systems a starting point for discovery of information about a particular game and
connected products, including trade secrets, intellectual property, and other
confidential business information
• disclosure would unreasonably affect the third party entity’s development cycle
and processes, and their ability to be competitive and offer consumers the best
possible product in a highly competitive market.
40. The third party entity also submits that disclosure of the code name for the video
game would unlikely provide any further clarity on the classification application and
decision.
41. Again, the applicant did not make any submissions that addressed the Department’s
application of the conditional exemption in s 47G.
42. I have considered the relevant material together with the submissions provided by the
third party entity. Although it is apparent that the video game in question has since
been launched, I accept that the code name used by the third party entity has not
been disclosed more broadly. Having regard to the context provided by the third party
entity, I also accept that disclosure of the relevant material could potentially be used
to discover other confidential information about the third party entity’s products,
including code names for other titles, trade secrets and intellectual property.
43. I also accept that the third party entity’s contention that disclosure is unlikely to
provide any further insight into the third party entity’s application or the Classification
Board’s decision on the classification of the video game.
44. Accordingly, I consider that any public benefit in disclosure of the relevant material is
outweighed by the private interests of the third party entity. I am satisfied that
disclosure of the relevant material could reasonably be expected to adversely affect
the business affairs of the third party entity.
Finding
45. The relevant material that the Department contends is exempt under s 47G is
conditionally exempt under s 47G(1)(a).
46. As I have found this material to be conditionally exempt under s 47G(1)(a), it is
unnecessary for me to consider whether the same material is also conditionally
exempt under s 47G(1)(b).
Whether access would be contrary to the public interest (s 11A(5))
47. Having found material to be conditionally exempt under ss 47F and 47G of the FOI Act,
I am required to consider whether it would be contrary to the public interest to give
the applicant access to conditionally exempt material at this time. The requirements
of the public interest test are set out at Annexure A. I have considered the relevant
mandatory factors listed in s 11B(3) of the FOI Act. I have not considered the irrelevant
7
oaic.gov.au
link to page 8
factors as set out in s 11B(4) of the FOI
Act.8 In considering the public interest, I have
had regard to the parties’ submissions.
48. The Department contends that the only factor in favour of disclosure of the
conditionally exempt material is that disclosure would promote the objects of the FOI
Act by providing the Australian community with access to information held by the
Australian Government. The Department considers that disclosure would not inform
debate on a matter of public importance, promote effective oversight of public
expenditure, or allow the applicant access to their own personal information.
49. Against this factor in favour of disclosure, the Department contends that the following
factors weigh against disclosure, whereby disclosure of the relevant material could
reasonably be expected to:
• prejudice the management functions of an agency and the Department’s
ability to meet its statutory obligations and responsibilities with respect to the
work health and safety of its employees
• prejudice the personal privacy of various individuals, and
• harm the commercial interests of the third party entity.
50. The applicant did not provide any submissions in response to the public interest.
51. I have considered the Department’s contentions together with the relevant material.
Given the Department has provided the applicant with much of the information in the
documents, I accept that disclosure of the relevant material comprising names,
signatures and the code name for the video game would not provide any further
insight into the third party entity’s application to the Classification Board or the
Classification Board’s decision. Accordingly, while I accept that disclosure would
promote the objects of the FOI Act, I give limited weight to this factor.
52. Based on my consideration of the relevant material and its context, I accept that the
factors against disclosure as identified by the Department are relevant in this case,
and I give significant weight to the factors against disclosure. It is apparent that
disclosure of the relevant material would have an adverse effect on the management
functions of the Department with respect to their work health and safety obligations
to its staff. I am also satisfied that disclosure could adversely impact the privacy rights
of the individuals named in the documents, as well as the business affairs of the third
party entity.
Finding (s 11A(5))
53. For the reasons set out above, I find that disclosure of the relevant material would be
contrary to the public interest at this time.
54. The material that I have found to be conditionally exempt under ss 47F and 47G is
exempt from disclosure.
Justin Lodge
Acting General Manager, FOI Case Management
Delegate of the Australian Information Commissioner for the purposes of s 55K of the
Freedom of Information Act 1982
23 January 2025
8 Listed in Annexure A.
8
oaic.gov.au
link to page 9 link to page 9
Annexure A
Relevant provisions of the FOI Act, FOI Guidelines, and decisions
Section 11A(4) of the FOI Act states the agency or Minister is not required by this Act to give
the person access to the document at a particular time if, at that time, the document is
an exempt document.
Irrelevant material (s 22)
Section 22 of the FOI Act authorises an agency to prepare and to give an applicant access to
an edited copy of a document if:
• an agency decides that giving access to a document would disclose information that
would reasonably be regarded as irrelevant to the request for access (s22(1)(a)(ii)),
and
• it is possible for the agency or Minister to prepare an edited copy of the document (s
22(1)(b)), and
• it is reasonably practicable to prepare an edited copy, having regard to the nature
and extent of the modification required, and the resources available to modify the
document (s 22(1)(c)), and
• it is not apparent, from an applicant’s request or consultation with the applicant,
that the applicant would decline access to the edited copy (s 22(1)(d)).
The FOI Guidelines state:
A request should be interpreted as extending to any document that might
reasonably be taken to be included within the description the applicant has
used.9
Personal privacy exemption (s 47F)
Section 47F of the FOI Act states ‘A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under
this Act would involve the unreasonable disclosure of
personal information about any
person (including a deceased person).’
Section 4(1) of the FOI Act states ‘personal information’ has the same meaning as the
Privacy
Act 1988, which provides:
personal information means information or an opinion about an identified
individual, or an individual who is reasonably identifiable:
(a) whether the information or opinion is true or not; and
(b) whether the information or opinion is recorded in a material form or not
.10
Section 47F(2) of the FOI Act states that in determining whether the disclosure of
the document would involve the unreasonable disclosure of personal information, an
agency or Minister decision maker must have regard to the following matters:
• the extent to which the information is well known
9
FOI Guidelines at [3.54] footnoting
Re Gould and Department of Health [1985] AATA 63.
10 Section 6(1) of the
Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (emphasis in original).
9
oaic.gov.au
link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10
• whether the person to whom the information relates is known to be (or to have
been) associated with the matters dealt with in the document
• the availability of the information from publicly available sources, and
• any other matters that the agency or Minister considers relevant.
As discussed in the FOI Guidelines and IC review cases
,11 the main requirements of this public
interest conditional exemption are that a document contains ‘personal information;’
disclosure in response to the applicant’s FOI request would be ‘unreasonable’ (s 47(1)); and
it would be ‘contrary to the public interest’ to release the material at the time of the decision
(s 11A(5)).
The FOI Guidelines explain that the test of ‘unreasonableness’ in s 47F ‘implies a need to
balance the public interest in disclosure of government-held information and the private
interest in the privacy of individuals
’.12
In addition to the mandatory factors outlined at s 47F(2) of the FOI Act, the FOI Guidelines
explain that other relevant factors include:
a) the author of the document is identifiable
b) the document contains third party personal information
c) release of the document would cause stress to the third party
d) no public purpose would be achieved through release.
…
• the nature, age and current relevance of the information
• any detriment that disclosure may cause o the person to whom the information relates
• any opposition to disclosure expressed or likely to be held by that person
• the circumstances of an agency’s or minister’s collection and use of the information
• the fact that the FOI Act does not control or restrict any subsequent use or dissemination
of information released under the FOI Act
• any submission an FOI applicant chooses to make in support of their request as to their
reasons for seeking access and their intended or likely use or dissemination of the
information and
• whether disclosure of the information might advance the public interest in government
transparency and integri
ty.13
The last-mentioned factor – the public interest in government transparency and integrity – is
to be balanced with all other relevant factors arising in the particular case, including the
private interest that third party individuals may have in maintaining privacy of their personal
informati
on.14
11 Generally, see FOI Guidelines
at
[6.119] – [6.155];
‘AEE’ and Department of Defence (Freedom of
information) [2023] AICmr 69;
‘AED’ and Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (Freedom of
information) [2023] AICmr 67;
'OE' and Australian Taxation Office (Freedom of information) [2018] AICmr
29.
12 FOI Guidelines at [6.133].
13 FOI Guidelines at [6.137] – [6.138] (footnotes omitted).
14 FOI Guidelines
at [6.139].
10
oaic.gov.au
link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11
Business affairs exemption (s 47G)
Section 47G of the FOI Act states:
(1) A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act would disclose
information concerning a person in respect of his or her business or professional affairs or
concerning the business, commercial or financial affairs of an organisation or undertaking, in
a case in which the disclosure of the information:
(a) would, or could reasonably be expected to, unreasonably affect that person
adversely in respect of his or her lawful business or professional affairs or that
organisation or undertaking in respect of its lawful business, commercial or financial
affairs; or
(b) could reasonably be expected to prejudice the future supply of information to
the Commonwealth or an agency for the purpose of the administration of a law of
the Commonwealth or of a Territory or the administration of matters administered
by an agency.
Section 47G(2) – (3) of the FOI Act contain exceptions to the exemption in s 47G(1) of the FOI
Act.
As stated in the FOI Guidelines, this conditional exemption does not apply in the following
circumstances:
… if the document contains only business information about the FOI applicant (s 47G(3)).
Where the business information concerns both the FOI applicant and another business, the
provision may operate to conditionally exempt the FOI applicant’s information, but only if
the FOI applicant’s business information cannot be separated from the information of the
other business or undertaking.
… to trade secrets or other information to which s 47 applies (s 47G(2)). In other words, a
decision maker should consider an exemption under s 47 for documents containing trade
secrets or other information to which s 47 applies if the circumstances call for it. This is a
limited exception to the normal rule that more than one exemption may apply to the same
information (see s 32
).15
Section 47G(1)(a)
The FOI Guidelines explain that the operation of s 47G of the FOI Act depends on the effect of
disclosure, rather than the precise nature of the information itsel
f.16 Notwithstanding this,
the information must have some relevance to a person in respect of their business or
professional affairs or to the business, commercial and financial affairs of the organisation
.17
The FOI Guidelines state:
The use of the term ‘business or professional affairs’ distinguishes an individual’s personal or
private affairs and an organisation’s internal affairs. The term ‘business affairs’ has been
interpreted to mean ‘the totality of the money-making affairs of an organisation or
undertaking as distinct from its private or internal affairs
.18
In relation to the question of unreasonableness, the FOI Guidelines state:
The presence of ‘unreasonably’ in s 47G(1) implies a need to balance public and private
interests. The public interest, or some aspect of it, will be one of the factors in determining
15 FOI Guidelines at [6.179] – [6.180].
16 FOI Guidelines at [6.181].
17 FOI Guidelines at [6.181].
18 FOI Guidelines at [6.191] (footnotes omitted).
11
oaic.gov.au
link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 12
whether the adverse effect of disclosure on a person in respect of his or her business affairs is
unreasonable. A decision maker must balance the public and private interest factors to
decide whether disclosure is unreasonable for the purposes of s 47G(1)(a), but this does not
amount to the public interest test in s 11A(5) which follows later in the decision process
.19
The FOI Guidelines further state:
The test of reasonableness applies not to the claim of harm but to the objective assessment
of the expected adverse effect. For example, the disclosure of information that a business’
activities pose a threat to public safety, damage the natural environment, or that a service
provider has made false claims for government money, may have a substantial adverse effect
on that business but may not be unreasonable in the circumstances to disclose. Similarly, it
would not be unreasonable to disclose information about a business that revealed serious
criminality. These considerations require weighing the public interest against a private
interest – preserving the profitability of a business. However at this stage it bears only on the
threshold question of whether disclosure would be unreasonable
.20
Section 47G(1)(b)
The FOI Guidelines state:
This limb of the conditional exemption comprises 2 parts:
• a reasonable expectation of a reduction in the quantity or quality of business affairs
information to the government
• the reduction will prejudice the operations of the agency
.21
Public interest test
Section 11A(5)of the FOI Act states the agency or Minister must give the person access to the
document if it is conditionally exempt at a particular time unless (in the circumstances)
access to the document at that time would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest.
Section 11B(3) of the FOI Act sets out a non-exhaustive list of public interest factors
favouring disclosure for consideration, those factors being where disclosure of the
document would do any of the following:
(a) promote the objects of the FOI Act
(b) inform debate on a matter of public importance
(c) promote effective oversight of public expenditure
(d) allow a person access to their personal information.
Section 11B(4) of the FOI Act also lists the following irrelevant factors that must not be
taken into consideration when deciding whether access would, on balance, be contrary to
the public interest:
(a) access to the document could result in embarrassment to the Commonwealth
Government, or cause a loss of confidence in the Commonwealth Government
(b) access to the document could result in any person misinterpreting or
misunderstanding the document
19 FOI Guidelines at [6.184] (footnotes omitted).
20 FOI Guidelines at [6.185] (footnotes omitted).
21 FOI Guidelines at [6.197] footnoting
Re Angel and the Department of the Arts, Heritage and the
Environment; HC Sleigh Resources Ltd and Tasmania [1985] AATA 314.
12
oaic.gov.au
link to page 13 link to page 13
(c) the author of the document was (or is) of high seniority in the agency to which
the request for access to the document was made
(d) access to the document could result in confusion or unnecessary debate.
In addition to the factors set out at s 11B(3) of the FOI Act, the FOI Guidelines set out a further
non-exhaustive list of public interest factors in favour of disclosure, as well as public interest
factors against disclosure
.22
The FOI Guidelines explain:
To conclude that, on balance, disclosure of a document would be contrary to the
public interest is to conclude that the benefit to the public resulting from
disclosure is outweighed by the benefit to the public of withholding the
information. The decision maker must analyse, in each case, where on balance the
public interest lies based on the particular facts at the time the decision is ma
de.23
22 FOI Guidelines at [6.229] – [6.233].
23 FOI Guidelines at [6.238] (footnote omitted).
13
oaic.gov.au
Review rights
Review by the Administrative Review Tribunal
If a party to an IC review is unsatisfied with an IC review decision, they may apply under s 57A
of the FOI Act to have the decision reviewed by the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART).
The ART provides independent merits review of administrative decisions and has power to
set aside, vary, or affirm an IC review decision.
An application to the ART must be made within 28 days of the day on which the applicant is
given the IC review decision (see s 18(1) of the
Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 and
rule 5(3) of the
Administrative Review Tribunal Rules 2024). An application fee may be payable
when lodging an application for review to the ART. Further information is available on the
ART's website (www.art.gov.au) or by telephoning 1800 228 333.
Making a complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman If you believe you have been treated unfairly by the OAIC, you can make a complaint to the
Commonwealth Ombudsman (the Ombudsman). The Ombudsman's services are free. The
Ombudsman can investigate complaints about the administrative actions of Australian
Government agencies to see if you have been treated unfairly.
If the Ombudsman finds your complaint is justified, the Ombudsman can recommend that
the OAIC reconsider or change its action or decision or take any other action that the
Ombudsman considers is appropriate. You can contact the Ombudsman's office for more
information on 1300 362 072 or visit the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s website at
http://www.ombudsman.gov.au. Accessing your information If you would like access to the information that we hold about you, please
contact
xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx. More information is available on the
Access our
information page on our website.
14
oaic.gov.au
