Our ref:
FOI25/264; CM25/8677
26 June 2025
By email: foi+request‐13231‐xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Applicant
Freedom of Information Request FOI25/264 – Decision letter
I write to give you a decision about your request to the Attorney‐General's Department (the department)
for access to documents under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act).
Your request
On 28 May 2025, you requested access to:
the response sent by the Attorney General to the Administrative Review Council in relation to
Systemic Issue No 1 2024. This document is referred to the most recent statement of meeting
outcomes by the Administrative Review Council: https://www.ag.gov.au/legal‐
system/publications/meeting‐arc‐31‐march‐2025‐statement‐meeting‐outcomes
Furthermore, I would like to request a document from the Administrative Review Council, if this is
possible through the Attorney Generals? The AGD provides the secretariat for the Council so I'm
wondering if you are the avenue for a request. Or would the ARC have a separate discrete pathway
you can refer me to?
If you can process it or refer it, I seek:
The minutes or meeting notes that record the justifications raised by the ARC members for
proceeding or not proceeding with an inquiry into the relevant systemic issue.
At the moment the only insight into the decision is the following statement:
"The Council noted responses received from the Attorney‐General, Minister for Social Services and
the Secretary, Department of Social Services in relation to the Notice of Systemic Issue No. 1 of 2024
(published on the Administrative Review Tribunal’s website). The Council decided not to commence
an inquiry into the systemic issue."
I note the ARC raised the right to reasons as a possible priority area in its first meeting, so I feel this
is a chance to provide more substantive reasoning to the public. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes and
all that. I do note that the outcomes made reference to the ARC developing "a procedure for
responding to systemic issue reports". If this means reasons will be produced at a future date, I will
be happy to withdraw this request.
On 3 June 2025, the department acknowledged your request and advised it would process part 1 of your
request. The department provided additional information from the Administrative Review Council
Secretariat concerning the meeting notes you requested and sought your agreement to withdraw part 2 of
your request. You responded the same day and advised:
On my read, the ARC secretariat response does not commit the Council producing a statement of
reasons for the decision to not take up Systemic Issue No. 1. In those circumstances, I would like to
maintain my request. I will of course study the document issued on the 13 June to see if it will result
in reasons for this first systemic review decision being produced.
If the ARC is a separate entity for the purposes of FOI, happy for you to refer the request. I can
contact ARC with my contact details if a method of contacting the Secretariat is supplied.
On 5 June 2025, the department wrote to you and recommended that you make a separate FOI request
directly via email to the Administrative Review Council Secretariat at xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xx.xxx.xx relating to
part 2 of your request. The department confirmed that it would process part 1 for your request:
I would like to request the response sent by the Attorney General to the Administrative Review
Council in relation to Systemic Issue No 1 2024. This document is referred to the most recent
statement of meeting outcomes by the Administrative Review Council:
https://www.ag.gov.au/legal‐system/publications/meeting‐arc‐31‐march‐2025‐statement‐
meeting‐outcomes
On 6 June 2025, the department wrote to you an sought a 30‐day extension of time under section 15AA of
the FOI Act to process your request. Additionally, the department sought your agreement to exclude the
below categories of information:
‐
duplicates of documents that are in scope;
‐
personal information of members of the public;
‐
contact details for teams, internal to the department and other agencies
‐
personal information belonging to officers of the department and other government agencies.
The department did not receive a response from you.
A decision in relation to your request is due on 27 June 2025.
My decision
I am an officer authorised under s 23(1) of the FOI Act to make decisions in relation to freedom of
information requests made to the department.
I have identified 1 document that falls within the scope of your request. I did this by making inquiries of
staff likely to be able to identify relevant documents and arranging for comprehensive searches of relevant
departmental electronic and hard copy holdings.
In making my decision regarding access to the relevant documents, I have taken the following material into
account:
the terms of your request
the content of the documents identified as within scope of your request
the provisions of the FOI Act
consultation feedback from the Administrative Review Council Secretariat
the FOI Guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner (the Guidelines), and
Attorney-General's Department Freedom of Information Request FOI25/264 Decision letter
Page 2 of 6
I have decided to grant access in part to this document with material redacted pursuant to ss 47F(1) of the
FOI Act.
Additional information
Your review rights under the FOI Act are set out at
Attachment A to this letter.
The statement of reasons at
Attachment B sets out the reasons for my decision to refuse access to certain
material to which you have requested access.
The document to which I have decided to grant partial access under the FOI Act is at
Attachment C.
Disclosure log publication If an agency grants access to a document in response to an FOI request, it is
required to publish that information publicly on a website (the disclosure log) within 10 business days of
giving access to the information (subject to certain exceptions for personal and business information that it
would be unreasonable to publish). The documents released to you in this decision will be published on the
department's disclosure log on or before 10 July 2025.
Questions about this decision
If you wish to discuss this decision, the FOI case officer for this matter is Kellie, who can be reached on
(02) 6141 6666 or by email to xxx@xx.xxx.xx.
Yours sincerely
Stephen Still
Assistant Secretary
Administrative Law Branch
Attachments
Attachment A:
Review rights
Attachment B:
Statement of reasons
Attachment C:
Document
Attorney-General's Department Freedom of Information Request FOI25/264 Decision letter
Page 3 of 6
Attachment A – Your review rights
If you disagree with my decision, you may ask for an internal review or Information Commissioner review.
We encourage you to seek internal review as a first step as it may provide a more rapid resolution of your
concerns.
Internal review You may apply for an internal review of my decision within 30 days of receiving this letter. Your request for
internal review must be in writing, and should provide reasons why you believe the review is necessary.
You may apply by emailing xxx@xx.xxx.xx or by post to:
Director, Freedom of Information and Privacy Section
Office of Corporate Counsel
Attorney‐General’s Department
3‐5 National Circuit
BARTON ACT 2600
Another officer will make a new decision on your request within 30 days of receiving your request for
internal review. If you are unhappy with the internal review decision, you may ask for an information
Commissioner review.
Information Commissioner review
Information Commissioner review requests must be submitted within 60 days of the relevant decision,
unless an extension of time is granted. Your request should include your contact details, a copy of my
decision, and the reasons why you disagree with my decision. You can apply in one of the following ways:
Online: https://webform.oaic.gov.au/prod?entitytype=ICRequest&layoutcode=ICRequestWF
Email: xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
Mail: Director of FOI Dispute Resolution, GPO Box 5288, Sydney NSW 2001.
More information about Information Commissioner review is available at:
https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom‐of‐information/your‐freedom‐of‐information‐rights/freedom‐of‐
information‐reviews/information‐commissioner‐review
FOI Complaints
If you are concerned about how we handled your FOI request, please let us know what we could have done
better, as we may be able to rectify the situation. If you are not satisfied with our response, you can make a
complaint to the Information Commissioner. Your complaint must be in writing, and can be lodged in one
of the following ways:
Online: https://webform.oaic.gov.au/prod?entitytype=Complaint&layoutcode=FOIComplaintWF
Email: xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
Mail: Director of FOI Dispute Resolution, GPO Box 5288, Sydney NSW 2001.
More information about Freedom of Information complaints is available at:
https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom‐of‐information/your‐freedom‐of‐information‐rights/freedom‐of‐
information‐complaints
Attorney-General's Department Freedom of Information Request FOI25/264 Decision letter
Page 4 of 6
Attachment B ‐ Statement of reasons ‐ FOI25/264
This document, when read in conjunction with the decision letter provides information about the
reason I have decided not to disclose certain material to you in response to your request for a
document under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act).
Public interest conditional exemptions
An agency or minister can refuse access to a document or part of a document that is conditionally
exempt from disclosure under Division 3 of Part IV of the FOI Act
. The document for your request
which is conditionally exempt under Division 3 relates to personal privacy (s 47F).
Information about conditional exemptions can be obtained from the Guidelines available at:
https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom‐of‐information/foi‐guidelines/part‐6‐conditional‐exemptions.
Where a document is assessed as conditionally exempt, it is only exempt from disclosure if
disclosure would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest. The public interest test is weighted
in favour of giving access to documents so that the public interest in disclosure remains at the
forefront of decision making.
A single public interest test applies to conditional exemptions. This public interest test includes
certain factors that
must be taken into account where relevant, and other factors which
must not be
taken into account. My reasoning in regard to the public interest are set out under the heading
‘
Section 11A(5): Public interest test’ below.
Section 47F: Public interest conditional exemption ‐ personal privacy
Section 47F(1) of the FOI Act provides that a document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure would
involve the unreasonable disclosure of personal information about any person (including a deceased
person). For the purposes of the FOI Act, personal information is defined as: information or an
opinion about an identified individual, or an individual who is reasonably identifiable whether the
information or opinion is true or not; and whether the information or opinion is recorded in a
material form or not.
I have identified a personal email address relating to a private individual in the relevant document
for your request
.
In deciding whether to conditionally exempt the personal information described above, I have had
regard to the following factors set out in s 47F(2) of the FOI
Act:
(a) the extent to which the information is well known;
(b) whether the people to whom the information relates are known to be (or to have been)
associated with the matters dealt with in the document;
(c) the availability of the information from publicly accessible sources;
(d) any other matters that the agency considers relevant.
In my view the relevant personal information is not well known. The information is known only to
the persons whose information appears in the documents and departmental officers with
responsibility for the matters concerned.
Attorney-General's Department Freedom of Information Request FOI25/264 Decision letter
Page 5 of 6
Accordingly, I am satisfied that the personal email address of the individual is conditionally exempt
under s 47F(1) of the FOI Act. I have turned my mind to whether disclosure of the information would
be contrary to the public interest, and have included my reasoning in this regard under the header
‘
Section 11A(5): Public interest test’.
Section 11A(5): Public interest test
Access to a conditionally exempt document must generally be given unless doing so would be
contrary to the public interest. The Guidelines issued by the OAIC provide at paragraph 6.224 that
the public interest test is considered to be:
something that is of serious concern or benefit to the public, not merely of individual interest,
not something of interest to the public, but in the interest of the public,
not a static concept, where it lies in a particular matter will often depend on a balancing of
interests,
necessarily broad and non‐specific, and
related to matters of common concern or relevance to all members of the public, or a
substantial section of the public.
In deciding whether to disclose conditionally exempt material, I have considered the factors
favouring access set out in s 11B(3) of the FOI Act. I have not taken into account the irrelevant
factors listed under s 11B(4) of the FOI Act.
Of the factors favouring disclosure, I consider that release of the conditionally exempt material
identified for your request would promote the objects of the FOI Act by enhancing the scrutiny of
government decision making.
The FOI Act does not list any specific factors weighing against disclosure. However, I have considered
the non‐exhaustive list of factors against disclosure in the Guidelines as well as the particular
circumstances relevant to the conditionally exempt material.
I consider the release of the conditionally exempt material could, as the case may be, reasonably be
expected to prejudice:
the protection of an individual’s right to privacy, and
harm the interests of an individual or group of individuals.
On balance, I consider the factors against disclosure outweigh the factors favouring access and that
providing access to the conditionally exempt material identified for your request would be contrary
to the public interest.
Attorney-General's Department Freedom of Information Request FOI25/264 Decision letter
Page 6 of 6
