Hansen and Queensland Industry Development Corporation
(1995 S0049, 14 June 1996)
This decision dealt solely with the jurisdictional point of whether documents falling within the terms of an FOI access application were excluded from the application of the FOI Act by s.11A of the FOI Act and s.35(2) of the Queensland Industry Development Corporation Act 1994. Those provisions have the effect that the FOI Act does not apply to a document received or brought into existence by the QIDC in carrying out its activities conducted on a commercial basis.
The applicant was a former employee of the QIDC. He had been dismissed following his refusal to accept a transfer, and sought a review of his dismissal pursuant to s.18(5) of the Queensland Industry Development Corporation Act 1985. He subsequently sought access under the FOI Act to documents relating to the review of his dismissal, but the QIDC contended that the FOI Act did not apply to documents falling within the terms of his application because of the above provisions.
The Information Commissioner discussed the meaning of "commercial" and rejected an argument by the QIDC that all of its activities were conducted on a commercial basis. The Information Commissioner determined that the termination of the applicant's employment on the basis that he would not accept a transfer, and the subsequent review of that termination under s.18(5) of the Queensland Industry Development Corporation Act 1985, were not activities conducted on a commercial basis. The Information Commissioner therefore determined that the documents falling within the terms of the initial FOI access application were not excluded from the operation of the FOI Act and that the Information Commissioner had jurisdiction to consider the application for external review.
