Luck and University of Southern Queensland

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL Nº 2008/1091
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION
Re:GAYE LUCK
Applicant

And:UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN QUEENSLAND
Respondent

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2008] AATA 539
Tribunal: G.D. Friedman, Senior Member
Date:29 May 2008
Place:Melbourne
Decision:For reasons given orally at the hearing, the Tribunal decides that it does not have jurisdiction to determine the application lodged by the applicant and dismisses the application in accordance with s 42A(4) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975.

(sgd) G.D. Friedman
Senior Member

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – jurisdiction issue – decision made under a state enactment
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth)
Freedom of Information Act 1992 (Qld)
REASONS FOR DECISION

29 May 2008

         G.D. Friedman, Senior Member

1.        On 17 August 2006 Ms Luck sought access under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) and Freedom of Information Act 1992 (Qld) to documents held by the University of Southern Queensland.
2.        On 13 March 2008 Ms Luck lodged an application to the Tribunal for review of a deemed decision by the University to refuse access under the FOI Act (Cth).
3.        The object of the FOI Act (Cth) as specified in s 3(1) of that Act is …to extend as far as possible the right of the Australian community to access to information in the possession of the Government of the Commonwealth…
4. The Tribunal was established under Commonwealth legislation. Under s 25 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 it may only review certain decisions as provided for in an enactment. This refers to a Commonwealth enactment. The University of Southern Queensland is established under the University of Southern Queensland Act 1998 (Qld) which is not a Commonwealth enactment.
5. Therefore the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to review the decision and the Tribunal dismisses the application under s 42A(4) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975.
I certify that the five [5] preceding paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision of:
G.D. Friedman, Senior Member
(sgd) Mara Putnis
  Associate

Date of hearing:  9 May 2008
Date of decision:  29 May 2008
Advocate for the applicant:          Self-represented
Advocate for the respondent:       Ms P. Steele, University of Southern Queensland

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, Ms. Gaye Luck applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for review of a decision by the University of Southern Queensland to refuse her access to certain documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) and the Freedom of Information Act 1992 (Qld). The Tribunal was required to determine whether it had jurisdiction to hear the application. The central legal issue was whether the Tribunal, established under Commonwealth legislation, had the authority to review a decision made by a state institution, the University of Southern Queensland, under state legislation.

The Tribunal found that it did not have jurisdiction to review the University's decision because the University was established under Queensland legislation, not a Commonwealth enactment. The Tribunal noted that it can only review decisions made under a Commonwealth enactment, and the University of Southern Queensland Act 1998 (Qld) falls outside this scope. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application as it did not have the jurisdiction to determine the matter under section 42A(4) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975. The Tribunal certified that the decision was based on the correct interpretation of the relevant legislation and that the five preceding paragraphs accurately reflect the reasons for the decision.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established