Mentink and Queensland Corrective Services Commission
(1995 S0064, 1 December 1997)
The first document in issue was a letter to prison authorities asking that the applicant (then a prisoner) be restrained from attempting to correspond with the juvenile in respect of whom the applicant had been convicted of offences. The Information Commissioner found that with the exception of one segment of information which had already been disclosed to the applicant, the letter was exempt matter under s.44(1) of the FOI Act, according to principles stated in Stewart and Department of Transport (1993) 1 QAR 227 and B and Brisbane North Regional Health Authority(1994) 1 QAR 279 on information concerning shared personal affairs.
The other matter in issue comprised a letter to the Attorney-General (protesting the inadequacy of the sentence imposed on the applicant), as well as the identity of one of its authors. The Information Commissioner found that some information in parts of the letter lacked the necessary "quality of confidence", as it was already known to the applicant, and could not qualify for exemption under s.46(1)(a) of the FOI Act, but that the balance of the letter was exempt matter under s.46(1)(a).
The applicant commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court under the Judicial Review Act 1991 Qld alleging that my decision was affected by several legal errors. The Information Commissioner's decision was subsequently affirmed in the proceedings under the Judicial Review Act 1991 Qld.