File No: 13/2343
Date: 12 April 2013
Mr Patrick Gardner
By E-mail only: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Mr Gardner
Re: Freedom of Information Request
I refer to your request under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (‘the Act’)
dated 10 February
2013, in which you seek access to copies of the following documents:
‘(a) Electronically available documents prepared prior to Australia’s ratification of the
Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement (‘AUSFTA’), which discuss amendments to
the Copyright Act (1968) in order to comply with provisions of AUSFTA.
(b) Electronically available documents prepared following Australia’s ratification of
AUSFTA, of the same kind requested in (a).
(c) Any electronically available correspondence with the Productivity Commission in
relation to the impact of AUSFTA on intellectual property rights and associated legislation’.
Request Consultation Process
Section 24 of the Act provides that where a ‘practical refusal reason’ exists in relation to a request
the Agency must undertake a ‘request consultation process’ with the applicant. Under section
24AA of the Act it is clear that a practical refusal reason will exist where the work involved in
processing the request ‘would substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of the Agency
from its other operations’.
Intention to refuse request
On 28 February 2013, you were provided with notice over e-mail that this Department intended to
refuse access to documents in accordance with your request on the basis that it would ‘substantially
and unreasonably divert the resources of the Agency from its other operations’.
Practical Refusal Reason
I am advised by the relevant areas of the Department that coming within the ambit of your request
are up to 70 files, some containing up to 50 or more documents. These files would have to be
individually examined by multiple officers in order to identify documents relevant to your request
and process them accordingly. To complete that would require a significant period of time– in
excess of 70 hours which would constitute a substantial and unreasonable diversion of this
Department’s resources.
Request Consultation period and contact officer
On 28 February 2013, you were advised over e-mail that you may consult with me with a view to
revising your request in a manner that may render it capable of being processed without
necessitating such a diversion of resources. A 14 day consultation period commenced from the date
of that notification. During that period you were encouraged to contact me on any of the details
above so that I could take reasonable steps to assist you to revise the request so that the practical
refusal reason no longer existed, but no correspondence was received from you within that period.
Under s24AB(9) of the Act, agencies are not obliged to undertake a second consultation process:
to avoid all doubt, this section only obliges the agency … to undertake a request
consultation process once for any particular request.
On 19 March 2013, out of courtesy– notice of a further 14 days was sent to you over e-mail, but no
correspondence was received from you within that extended period.
Please note that because you did not contact me within the consultation periods in accordance with
the notices provided to you on 28 February 2013 and 19 March 2013 respectively, your request is
now taken to be withdrawn under subsection 24AB(7)(a) of the Act, which states that:
(7) The request is taken to have been withdrawn under subsection (6) at the end of the consultation
period if:
(a) the applicant does not consult the contact person during the consultation period in
accordance with the notice; …
Yours sincerely,
Logan Tudor
Legal Officer
FOI & Privacy Section
Telephone: (02) 6141 3715
Email: xxxxx.xxxxx@xx.xxx.xx
2
