Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Whether the Department is justified in its decision to refuse a request for a record made under section 7 of the FOI Act on the basis that it is exempt from release under the provisions of the FOI Act, in accordance with sections 20, 21, 22, 26 and 27 of the FOI Act.
The FOI request was made on 15 May 2008 to the Department. The Applicant sought:
"a copy of the report or reports in relation to telecommunications assets of the state or state-owned bodies, one of which report we understand is also known as or relates to Project Dingle"
In its decision of 20 June 2008 the Department, having identified one report entitled "Potential for Enhancing and Augmenting Semi State Telecommunications Assets", refused the request in accordance with sections 20, 21, 26 and 27 of the FOI Act and found that the balance of the public interest lies against release of the report. On 25 June 2008 the Applicant sought an internal review of the Department's decision, which, in its internal review decision of 11 July 2008, the Department upheld.
The Applicant applied to this Office on 31 July 2008 seeking a review of the Department's decision.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.