Mr Christopher Gentle
By email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx

Dear Mr Gentle
LS6217 – FOI Request – Decision record and reasons
1.  I refer to your email dated 15 August 2017 at 6:14 AM to the Australian Electoral Commission
(‘AEC’) in which you request (‘your FOI Request’) under the Freedom of Information Act 1982
(Cth) (‘the FOI Act’) access to documents relating to the ABS’ Marriage Law Postal Survey and 16
and 17 year olds.
2.  I am writing today to give you a decision about access to documents that you requested in your
FOI Request.
Summary
3.  I, Lauren Collett, Senior Lawyer, of the AEC, am an officer authorised under section 23(1) of the
FOI Act to make decisions in relation to FOI requests.
4.  Specifically you sought access to:
•  “correspondence, advice and ministerial communication related to the determination that
16 and 17 year olds will not be surveyed in the Marriage Law Postal Survey, and
•  correspondence, advice and ministerial communication related of the
Treasurer’s direction to the ABS with regard to its definition of “elector” for the Marriage
Law Postal Survey.”
5.  I coordinated searches for relevant documents to be conducted of files held by the Legal and
Procurement Branch of the AEC, the Executive of the AEC and the Parliamentary and Strategic
Engagement section of the AEC.
6.  Following these searches I have identified nine documents which fall within the scope of your
request.
7.  With regard to the documents that you have requested (set out in Attachment A), I have decided
to:
(a)  grant access to one document;
(b)  refuse access to one document and to offer in lieu to grant access to an edited version of
this document; and
(c)  refuse access to the remaining seven documents.
8.  More information, including my reasons for my decision, is set out below.
50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 1

link to page 2

Decision and reasons for decision
Decision
9.  With regard to the documents identified in Attachment A, I have decided:

(a)  to grant access in full to Document No. 3;
(b)  to refuse access to Document No. 9 under section 47F – personal privacy, as providing
access would be contrary to the public interest and, in lieu, to offer to grant access in part
to Document No. 9 with exempt and irrelevant matter deleted under section 22 of the FOI
Act;
(c)  to refuse access to Document Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 under section 42 – legal professional
privilege;
(d)  to refuse access to Document Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 under sections 47C – deliberative
processes, and section 47F – personal privacy, as providing access would be contrary to
the public interest.

Material taken into account
10. In reaching my decision, I have taken the following information into account:
(a)  the content of the documents that fall within the scope of your FOI Request;
(b)  the FOI Act, specifically sections 22, 42, 47C, and 47F;
(c)  the guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner under section 93A of the
FOI Act (the “FOI Guidelines”)1, specifically;
i.  Section 4 (definition of ‘document’), specifically paragraphs 2.29 – 2.44;
ii.  Section 22 (Access to edited copies with exempt or  irrelevant matter deleted), specifically
paragraphs 3.85 – 3.90;
iii.  Section 42 (Documents subject to legal professional privilege):  Part 5 (Exemptions),
specifically paragraphs 5.126 – 5.154;
iv.  Section  47C (Public interest conditional exemptions—deliberative  processes):  Part 6
(Conditional Exemptions), specifically paragraphs 6.1 – 6.28 and 6.52 – 6.88; and
v.  Section  47F (Public interest conditional exemptions—personal privacy):  Part 6 (Conditional
Exemptions), specifically paragraphs 6.1 – 6.28 and 6.124 – 6.179;
and
(d)  Relevant case law.

1 Available here: https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/foi-guidelines/
50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 2

link to page 3

Reasons
11. Attachment A indicates each document to which access is refused. My reasons for refusing
access are given below.
Section 42 of the FOI Act (legal professional privilege)
12. Under subsection 42(1) of the FOI Act, a document is an exempt document if it is of such a nature
that it would be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional
privilege (LPP).
13. Section 42 of the FOI Act provides:
42 Documents subject to legal professional privilege
(1)    A document is an exempt document if it is of such a nature that it would be privileged from production
in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.
(2)    A document is not an exempt document because of subsection (1) if the person entitled to claim
legal professional privilege in relation to the production of the document in legal proceedings waives
that claim.
(3)    A document is not an exempt document under subsection (1) by reason only that:
(a)     the document contains information that would (apart from this subsection) cause the
document to be exempt under subsection (1); and
(b)    the information is operational information of an agency.
Note:   For operational information, see section 8A.
14. As the FOI Act does not provide a definition for LPP, for the purposes of this exemption, the
common law concepts of LPP apply.
15. The underlying common law principle of LPP is to promote the full and frank disclosure between a
lawyer and a client to the benefit of the effective administration of justice: See the High Court
decision of Esso Australia Resources Ltd v Commissioner for Taxation [1999] HCA 672 (Esso).
While the information in a document is relevant and assists in any determination, the common law
test focuses on the purpose of the communication requiring a “dominant purpose test” rather than
a “sole purpose test” see Esso.
16. The courts have established the following principles to be considered when determining whether a
communication is privileged:
(a)  whether there is a legal adviser-client relationship;
(b)  whether the communication was for the purpose of giving or receiving legal advice, or use
in connection with actual or anticipated litigation;
(c)  whether the advice given is independent;

2 Esso Australia Resources Ltd v Commissioner for Taxation [1999] HCA 67 - https://jade.io/j/#!/article/68169
50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 3

link to page 14 link to page 4

(d)  whether the advice given is confidential.
See FOI Guidelines, Part 5 – Exemptions at paragraph 5.129.
17. Where elements of a privileged communication has been disclosed, or disclosed in full to a third
party, the Courts have adopted the “inconsistency test” to assist in resolving whether the
“dominant purpose” of the communication has been waived. This test is of particular use in
disputes over implied waiver.
18. The “inconsistency test” examines whether particular conduct is inconsistent with the maintenance
of confidentiality which the privilege is intended to protect: see Mann v Carnell [1999] HCA 663 at
[53].
19. I have analysed each of the documents and am satisfied that Document Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 would
be privileged from production in legal proceedings on grounds of legal professional privilege and
that there has been no waiver, express or implied, which could have prevented the documents
from being exempt by operation of subsection 42(2) of the FOI Act. Therefore I have found the
documents are exempt under section 42 of the FOI Act.
Public interest conditional exemption – deliberative processes
20. With respect to Document Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, I found that:
(a)  Document No. 2 relates to the functions of the agency and the exchanging of opinions and
recommendations between the agency and the Minister’s office;
(b)  Document No. 4 contains an email chain between an officer at the ABS and an officer at
the AEC checking draft media release material, and containing recommendations and
advice between the agencies. The email chain forwards this to relevant officers in the AEC
which outlines deliberative internal processes and legal advice provided by the Chief Legal
Officer of the AEC;
(c)  Document No. 5 contains an email between legal practitioners of the AEC regarding
opinions and advice provided by the Chief Legal Officer;
(d)  Document No. 6 contains an email discussion regarding the recommendations and
opinions of the AEC’s Executive and Chief Legal Officer surrounding the processes of the
Agency and the Government;
(e)  Document No. 7 contains advice and recommendations from the AEC Chief Legal Officer
to contacts in other government departments regarding the development of legislation; and

3 Mann v Carnell [1999] HCA 66, https://jade.io/j/#!/article/68168
50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 4

(f)  Document No. 8 contains opinions and recommendations from the AEC Chief Legal Officer
to AEC officers regarding responses to questions.
21. Subsection 47C(1) of the FOI Act conditionally exempts a document if its disclosure under the
FOI Act would disclose matter in the nature of, or relating to, opinion, advice or recommendation
obtained, prepared or recorded, or consultation or deliberation that has taken place, in the course
of, or for the purposes of, the deliberative processes involved in the functions of the AEC (among
other things).
22. Subsection 47C of the FOI Act provides:
47C  Public interest conditional exemptions—deliberative processes
General rule
(1)     A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act would
disclose matter (deliberative matter) in the nature of, or relating to,
opinion, advice or recommendation obtained, prepared or recorded, or
consultation or deliberation that has taken place, in the course of, or for the
purposes of, the deliberative processes involved in the functions of:
(a)    an agency; or
(b)    a Minister; or
(c)    the Government of the Commonwealth.
Exceptions
(2)    Deliberative matter does not include either of the following:
(a)    operational information (see section 8A);
(b)    purely factual material.
Note:   An agency must publish its operational information (see section 8).
(3)    This section does not apply to any of the following:
(a)    reports (including reports concerning the results of studies, surveys
or tests) of scientific or technical experts, whether employed within
an agency or not, including reports expressing the opinions of such
experts on scientific or technical matters;
(b)    reports of a body or organisation, prescribed by the regulations, that
is established within an agency;
(c)    the record of, or a formal statement of the reasons for, a final
decision given in the exercise of a power or of an adjudicative
function.
Note:   Access must generally be given to a conditionally exempt document unless it would
be contrary to the public interest (see section 11A).
23. The relevant documents contain matter which relate to an opinion, advice, or recommendation
obtained, prepared or recorded, and also contain consultation or deliberation which has taken
place in the course of, or for the purposes of, the deliberative processes involved in the functions
of the AEC. The information contained in these documents is neither operational information nor
50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 5

purely factual material. The matter in the relevant documents is not merely descriptive or
incidental administrative content, nor is it the final decision. The matter in the documents go to
the weighing up and evaluation of the competing considerations that may have a bearing on a
course or action.
24. In making my decision I had regard to:
(a)  the extent to which the information is well-known;
(b)  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;
(c)  the availability of the information from publicly accessible sources;
(d)  FOI Guidelines, Part 6 (Exemptions), specifically paragraphs 6.1 – 6.28 and 6.56 – 6.77;
and
(e)  the information contained in the documents and the nature of the opinions, advice and
recommendations.
25. Accordingly, I am satisfied that Document Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 fall within the scope of the
conditional exemption for deliberative matter provided by section 47C of the FOI Act.
Public interest conditional exemption – personal privacy
26. With respect to Document Nos. 4 and 9, I found that:
(a)  Document Nos. 4 and 9 contain phone and mobile numbers of AEC officers.
27. Subsection 47F(1) of the FOI Act conditionally exempts personal information where it is
unreasonable to give access under an FOI Request.
28. Subsection 47F(1) of the FOI Act provides:
47F  Public interest conditional exemptions—personal privacy
General rule
(1)     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).
29. Personal information in the context of the FOI Act has the same meaning as in the Privacy Act
1988 (Cth) (‘the Privacy Act’). Subsection 6(1) of the Privacy Act 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
50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 6

(b)  Whether the information or opinion is recorded in a material form or not.
30. Paragraph 6.130 of the FOI Guidelines provides that ‘personal information can include a person’s
name, address, telephone number, date of birth, medical records, bank account details, taxation
information and signature.’
31. Further, paragraph 6.138 of the FOI Guidelines states the following about the unreasonableness
test in section 47F:
The personal privacy exemption is designed to prevent the unreasonable invasion of third
parties’ privacy. The test of ‘unreasonableness’ implies a need to balance the public interest in
disclosure of government-held information and the privacy interest in the privacy of individuals.
32. In making my decision I had regard to:
(a)  the extent to which the information is well known;
(b)  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;
(c)  the availability of the information from publicly accessible sources; and
(d)  FOI Guidelines, Part 6 (Conditional Exemptions) specifically paragraphs 6.1 – 6.28 and
6.124 – 6.179.
33. I have found that the phone mobile number details for the AEC officers contained in Document
Nos. 4 and 9 is unlikely to be known by you or widely known by members of the public.
34. I am satisfied that the third party personal information within Document Nos. 4 and 9 would be
unreasonable to disclosure as it is not well-known, there is not consent from the relevant
individuals for the release of their personal information, and the information is not widely
available in full or in part from publicly accessible sources.
35. Accordingly, I am satisfied that the document falls within the scope of the conditional exemption
for personal privacy provided by section 47F of the FOI Act.
Public interest considerations
36. Having found that Document Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 are conditionally exempt, I then
considered whether give access to the documents would be contrary to the public interest
37. Subsection 11A(5) of the FOI Act provides that an agency must give access to a document if it is
conditionally exempt unless (in the circumstances) it assesses the document would, on balance,
be contrary to the public interest (the public interest test).
50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 7

38. Paragraph 6.5 of the FOI Guidelines provides a definition of the public interest test with reference
to relevant case law. That is, the public interest test is something that is of serious concern or
benefit to the public, not merely of individual interest and not something of interest to the public,
but in the interest of the public.
39. My weighing of public interest factors follows.
40. I considered the following factors favouring disclosure:
(a)  promote the objects of the FOI Act;
(b)  inform debate on the matter of public importance; and
(c)  promote agency transparency.
41. I have also considered the following factors against disclosure, reflecting on the extent to which
disclosure would:
(a)  reasonably be expected to prejudice an individual’s right to privacy;
(b)  release into the public forum information which is not otherwise well-known;
(c)  be contrary to the circumstances in which the information was obtained; and
(d)  be limited in its application to a matter of public, as opposed to private, concern.
42. In accordance with subsection 11B(4) of the FOI Act I excluded from my consideration the
following matters:
(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;
(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; and
(d)  access to the document could result in confusion or unnecessary debate.
43. In considering the weighing of public interest factors, I had regard to the FOI Guidelines at
paragraphs 6.7 – 6.28.
44. In my view, the factors against disclosure of the documents in relation to sections 47C and 47F
outweigh the factors in favour of disclosure for the following reasons:
50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 8

(a)  disclosure could reasonably be expected to prejudice an agency’s ability to obtain
confidential information, or to prejudice their ability to obtain similar information in the
future;
(b)  disclosure could reasonably be expected to impede the flow of information between
Commonwealth agencies;
(c)  disclosure could reasonably be expected to prejudice the management function of an
agency; and
(d)  disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of an individual or a group of
individuals.
45. Accordingly, I am satisfied that the Document Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 are conditionally exempt
under subsections 47C and 47F of the FOI Act and because disclosure would be contrary to the
public interest and that the Document Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 should be treated as exempt
from disclosure under the FOI Act.
Preparation of an edited copy
46. In accordance with section 22 of the FOI Act, I next considered whether it is both possible and
practicable to prepare an edited copy of Document Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 from which
exempt or irrelevant material is redacted.
47. Section 22 of the FOI Act provides:
22  Access to edited copies with exempt or irrelevant matter deleted
Scope
(1)    This section applies if:
(a)    an agency or Minister decides:
(i)   to refuse to give access to an exempt document; or
(ii)    that to give access to a document would disclose information
that would reasonably be regarded as irrelevant to the
request for access; and
(b)    it is possible for the agency or Minister to prepare a copy (an edited
copy) of the document, modified by deletions, ensuring that:
(i)   access to the edited copy would be required to be given
under section 11A (access to Document Nos. on request);
and
(ii)    the edited copy would not disclose any information that would
reasonably be regarded as irrelevant to the request; and
(c)    it is reasonably practicable for the agency or Minister to prepare the
edited copy, having regard to:
(i)   the nature and extent of the modification; and
50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 9

(ii      the resources available to modify the document; and
(d)    it is not apparent (from the request or from consultation with the
applicant) that the applicant would decline access to the edited
copy.
Access to edited copy
(2)    The agency or Minister must:
(a)    prepare the edited copy as mentioned in paragraph (1)(b); and
(b)    give the applicant access to the edited copy.
Notice to applicant
(3)    The agency or Minister must give the applicant notice in writing:
(a)    that the edited copy has been prepared; and
(b)    of the grounds for the deletions; and
(c)    if any matter deleted is exempt matter—that the matter deleted is
exempt matter because of a specified provision of this Act.
(4)    Section 26 (reasons for decision) does not apply to the decision to refuse
access to the whole document unless the applicant requests the agency or
Minister to give the applicant a notice in writing in accordance with that
section.
48. I had regard to paragraphs 3.85 – 3.90 of the FOI Guidelines.
49. I have decided to grant access in full to Document No. 3.
50. I found that it is both possible and practicable to prepare an edited copy of to Document No. 9
from which exempt or irrelevant material is redacted. Material in this document is exempt under
section 47F of the FOI Act – personal privacy, and section 22 - information that is not in the
scope of your FOI request.
51. Accordingly, I have decided to grant access to an edited copy of Document No. 9 from which
the relevant exempt material has been removed in accordance with section 22 of the FOI Act.
52. In considering Document Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, I have had regard to paragraph 3.88 of the
FOI Guidelines which advises that a common sense approach in considering whether the
number of deletions would be so many that the remaining document would be of little or no value
to the applicant.
53. Taking the common sense approach, I have found that while it may be possible to provide an
edited copy of Document Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, it is not practicable to prepare an edited
copy, having regard to the nature and extent of the modification required. Further, the remaining
documents would contain so little information it would be of little to no value to the applicant.
54. According, I have decided to refuse access to an edited copy of Document Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7
and 8. Having found that section 42, and sections 47C and 47F would apply to these documents,
50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 10

and that it would be contrary to the public interest to disclose these documents, I have decided to
refuse access in full to Document Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.
Your review rights
55. If you are dissatisfied with my decision, you may apply for internal review or for review by the
Information Commissioner of my decision. We encourage you to seek internal review as a first
step as it may provide a more rapid resolution of your concerns.
Internal review
56. Under section 54 of the FOI Act, you may apply in writing to the AEC for an internal review of my
decision. In accordance with section 54B of the FOI Act an internal review application must be
made in writing, within 30 days of receipt of this letter.
57. No particular form is required for an application for internal review, but to assist the decision-maker
who will conduct the review, please attach the reasons why you believe review of the decision is
necessary.
58. Applications for internal review can be lodged in one of the following ways:
By email
xxxx@xxx.xxx.xx
By post
Attention: FOI Officer - Locked Bag 4007, Canberra ACT 2601
59. The internal review will be carried out by another officer within 30 days of receipt of your application.
Information Commissioner Review
60. Under section 54L of the FOI Act, you may apply to the Australian Information Commissioner to
review my decision. An application for review by the Information Commissioner must be made in
writing within 60 days of the receipt of this decision, and be lodged in one of the following ways:
Online
https://forms.business.gov.au/aba/oaic/foi-review-/
By email
xxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
By fax
+61 2 9284 9666
By post:
GPO Box 52189, Sydney NSW 2001
In person:
Level 3, 175 Pitt Street, Sydney NSW
61. More information about Information Commissioner Review is available on the Office of the
Australian Information Commissioner website. Go to www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/foi-
reviews.

50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 11

Questions about this decision
62. If you wish to discuss this decision, please contact me at:
email
xxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx
fax
02 6293 7657
post
Locked bag 4007, Canberra ACT 2601
phone
(02) 6271 4411

Yours sincerely
Lauren | Senior Lawyer
Legal Services Section | Legal & Procurement Branch
Australian Electoral Commission

13 September 2017

50 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra ACT 2600  P 02 6271 4411  F 02 6215 9999
www.aec.gov.au

Page 12

link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 13

Attachment A
LS6217 FOI REQUEST BY CHRISTOPHER GENTLE
LS6127 FOI Request for:
“correspondence, advice and ministerial communication related to the determination that 16 and 17 year olds will not be surveyed in the Marriage
Law Postal Survey
correspondence, advice and ministerial communication related to the Treasurer’s direction to the ABS with regard to its definition of “elector” for the
Marriage Law Postal Survey.”

SCHEDULE OF RELEVANT DOCUMENTS
Document
Description
Date
No.

Email from Paul Pirani, CLO, Legal & Procurement Branch, to internal AEC clients, regarding
14 August 2017
16 and 17 year olds and participation in the survey.
10:57AM
DECISION

Document No. 1  contains matter which is exempt under section 42 - legal professional privilege of the FOI
Act as it is made up of legal advice given by the Chief Legal Officer for AEC internal clients.

It is not possible to produce a meaningful edited copy of Document No. 1 once exempt matter is redacted.

I have decided to refuse access to Document No. 1.

Email from Paul Pirani, CLO, Legal & Procurement Branch, to AEC Executive and internal AEC
14 August 2017
clients, regarding 16 and 17 year olds and participation in the survey.
2:21PM
Page 13 of 17

link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14

Document
Description
Date
No.
DECISION
2.1.
Document No. 2 contains matter which is exempt under section 47C – deliberative processes of the FOI Act, as
it is noting conversations between the Chief Legal Officer and the Finance Ministers’ office.
2.2.
It is not possible to produce a meaningful edited copy of Document No. 2 once exempt matter is redacted.
2.3.
I have decided to refuse access to Document No. 2.

Question Time Brief (QTB) on entitlement to participation 16 and 17 year olds
14 August 2017
DECISION
3.1.
Document No. 3 is a brief on the ABS survey: entitlement to participation 16 and 17-year-olds.
3.2.
I have decided to give full access to Document No. 3.

Email chain from officers at ABS, to officer at AEC, and to other relevant parties at the AEC
10 August 2017
regarding the marriage law postal survey.
12:17 PM, 1:24PM,
1:53PM
DECISION
4.1.
Document No. 4 contains an email chain between an officer at the ABS and an officer at the AEC checking
draft media release material, and containing recommendations and advice between the agencies. The email
Page 14 of 17

link to page 14 link to page 14

Document
Description
Date
No.
chain forwards this to relevant officers in the AEC who discuss deliberative internal processes and legal advice
provided by the Chief Legal Officer of the AEC.
4.2.
The document contains matter which is exempt under section 47C – deliberative processes, section 42 – legal
professional privilege, section 47F – personal privacy, and section 22 – irrelevant material which is outside the
scope of the FOI request.
4.3.
It is not possible to produce a meaningful edited copy of Document No. 4 once exempt matter is redacted.
4.4.
I have decided to refuse access to Document No. 4.


Email within Legal Services section regarding legal advice given by Paul Pirani, CLO, Legal &
14 August 2017
Procurement Branch, to internal AEC clients, regarding 16 and 17 year olds and participation in
5:24PM
the survey.
DECISION
5.1.
Document No. 5 contains matter that is exempt under section 47C – deliberative processes and section 42 –
legal professional privilege as it comprises of legal advice and opinions given by the senior legal practitioners of
the AEC.
5.2.
It is not possible to produce a meaningful edited copy of Document No. 5 once exempt matter is redacted.
5.3.
I have decided to refuse access to Document No. 5.

Email between Paul Pirani, CLO AEC, to Tom Rogers, Jeff Pope, Andrew Gately, and relevant
14 August 2017
internal officers of the AEC, and others regarding the Treasurer’s Direction.
2:56 PM
Page 15 of 17

Document
Description
Date
No.

DECISION
6.1.
Document No. 6 contains matter that is exempt under section 47C – deliberative processes and section 42 –
legal professional privilege as it contains discussion between the Executive of the AEC and the Chief Legal
Officer surrounding processes of Government.
6.2.
It is not possible to produce a meaningful edited copy of Document No. 6 once exempt matter is redacted.
6.3.
I have decided to refuse access to Document No. 6.

Email from Paul Pirani, CLO AEC, to Office of Parliamentary Counsel, Department of Finance
12 August 2017
and AEC clients regarding enrolled persons
5:42 PM
DECISION
7.1.
Document No. 7 contains matter that is exempt under section 47C – deliberative processes and section 42
legal professional privilege.
7.2.
It is not possible to produce a meaningful edited copy of Document No. 7 once exempt matter is redacted.
7.3.
I have decided to refuse access to Document No. 7.

Email from Paul Pirani, CLO AEC, to David Lang, Gina Dario, Jeff Pope, Andrew Gately,
14 August 2017
Officers of the AEC, regarding urgent input on questions.
9:10 AM
Page 16 of 17

Document
Description
Date
No.
DECISION
8.1. Document No. 8 is exempt under section 47C – deliberative processes and section 42 – legal professional
privilege.
8.2.
It is not possible to produce a meaningful edited copy of Document No. 8 once exempt matter is redacted.
8.3.
I have decided to refuse access to Document No. 8.

Email from Emma White, Officer of AEC, to Paul Pirani, CLO AEC, regarding Questions on
14 August 2017
Notice –16 & 17 year old electors
11:15 AM
DECISION
9.1. Document No. 9 contains matter involving a question on notice on two topics. The document contains material
which is exempt under section 47F – personal privacy, and section 22 – irrelevant material which contains material
that is outside the scope of the FOI request.
9.2.
It is possible to produce a meaningful edited copy of Document No. 9 once exempt matter is redacted.
9.3.
I have decided to give access in part to Document No. 9.

END

Page 17 of 17

Document Outline