Jesser and University of Southern Queensland
(1994 S0051, 8 October 1997)
This case involved seven applications for amendment of information (contained in two documents) under Part 4 of the FOI Act. The Information Commissioner discussed and applied the principles set out in Doelle and Legal Aid Office (Queensland) (1993) 1 QAR 207. The Information Commissioner held that the mere presence of information relating to an applicant's personal affairs in a document was not sufficient to allow the applicant to apply for amendment of other information in the document which did not relate to the applicant's personal affairs. The Information Commissioner rejected the claim of the applicant that the whole of both documents comprised information relating to her personal affairs. The Information Commissioner also indicated that the form of any amendment was a matter for me to determine, taking into account the purpose for which the document was created or held by the respondent, and the views of both the applicant and the respondent.
Considering each application individually, the Information Commissioner found that two of the seven applications sought amendment of information which did not relate to the applicant's personal affairs. The Information Commissioner found that the subject matter of five applications for amendment (comprising information concerning the circumstances, and substance, of a complaint by the applicant of discrimination in the handling of her application for a job with the respondent) did relate to her personal affairs. The Information Commissioner decided that the information sought to be amended in three of those applications was inaccurate and in one other application, misleading. The Information Commissioner decided that three notations should be added to one document, and that the other document should be altered in one respect.