Our reference: FOIREQ16/00003
Mr Ben Fairless
By email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Mr Fairless
Outcome of your Freedom of Information request
I refer to your request for access to documents under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982
(Cth) (the FOI Act). Your request was received by the Office of the Australian Information
Commissioner (OAIC) on 19 January 2016.
On 19 January 2016, you requested access to ‘a copy of all applications made by an agency to
have an individual declared vexatious’.
On 21 January 2016, you revised the scope of your request to:
1. Applications by agencies to have an applicant declared vexatious which were not
granted, and
2. The reasons for the decision not to declare the individual or organisation vexatious.
Further, you also advised that you were willing to exclude:
1. Duplicates of documents
2. Personally identifiable information of the individuals or organisations to whom an
application has been made against, and
3. Names and direct contact details of officers of the agencies making the request.
On 3 February 2016, you clarified the scope and advised that you would prefer that whole
submissions (including supplementary submissions) be provided.
On 4 February 2016, you agreed to an extension of time under s 15AA of the FOI Act until 19
March 2016.
On 16 March 2016, you confirmed that you were wil ing to exclude from the scope of your
request any FOI applications that have been provided to our office in support of an agency’s
application to have someone be declared a vexatious applicant.
Decision on your request
I am an officer authorised under s 23(1) of the FOI Act to make decisions in relation to FOI
requests.
I have identified 37 documents that fal within the scope of your request. I have decided to
provide you access to all documents within scope of your request, with some material
redacted.
In making this decision, I have deleted material that can reasonably be regarded as irrelevant
to your request (s 22(1)(a)(ii) of the FOI Act).
The documents and a schedule containing a full list of the documents wil be provided to you
via email. Due to the size of the files, we wil be sending the documents to you over several
emails.
The schedule also notes 40 documents that I have decided are outside the scope of your FOI
request on the basis of discussions with you. My reasons for decision are provided below.
Material taken into account
I have taken the fol owing material into account in making my decision:
• the content of the documents that fal within the scope of your request
• submissions received from agencies who were consulted
• the FOI Act (specifically section 11A and 22)
• the Guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner under s 93A of the
FOI Act, in particular paragraphs [3.85]–[3.90], and
• the relevant case law.
Reasons for decision
Irrelevant matter (s22)
On 21 January 2016, you agreed to exclude the following:
• duplicates of documents
• personally identifiable information of the individuals or organisations to whom an
application has been made against, and
• the names and direct contact details of officers of the agencies making the request.
On 16 March 2016, you agreed to exclude from the scope of your request any FOI
applications that have been provided to our office in support of an agency’s application to
have someone be declared a vexatious applicant.
I have deleted the above information under s 22(1)(a)(ii) of the FOI Act on the basis that it
would reasonably be regarded as being irrelevant to your request.
If you disagree with my decision
Internal review
You have the right to apply for an internal review of my decision under Part VI of the Act. An
internal review wil be conducted, to the extent possible, by an officer of the Office of the
Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) who was not involved in or consulted in the
2
making of my decision. If you wish to apply for an internal review, you must do so in writing
within 30 days. There is no application fee for internal review.
If you wish to apply for an internal review, please mark your application for the attention of
the FOI Coordinator and state the grounds on which you consider that my decision should be
reviewed.
Further Review
You have the right to seek review of this decision by the Information Commissioner and the
Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT).
You may apply to the Information Commissioner for a review of my decision. If you wish to
apply for IC review, you must do so in writing within 60 days. Your application must provide
an address (including an email address or fax number) that we can send notices to, and
include a copy of this letter. A request for IC review can be made in relation to my decision, or
an internal review decision.
It is the Information Commissioner’s view that it wil usual y not be in the interests of the
administration of the FOI Act to conduct an IC review of a decision, or an internal review
decision, made by the agency that the Information Commissioner heads: the OAIC. For this
reason, if you make an application for IC review of my decision, it is likely that the Information
Commissioner will decide (under section 54W(b) of the FOI Act) not to undertake an IC review
on the basis that it is desirable that my decision be considered by the AAT.
Section 57A of the Act provides that, before you can apply to the AAT for review of an FOI
decision, you must first have applied for IC review.
Applications for internal review or IC review can be submitted to:
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5218
SYDNEY NSW 2001
Alternatively, you may submit your application or complaint by email to
xxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx, or by fax on 02 9284 9666. For further information, please call our
enquiries line on 1300 363 992.
Yours sincerely
Kevin Cheng
Merit Review and Investigation Officer
FOI Dispute Resolution
23 March 2016
3
Document Outline
