TNM and Anti-Discrimination Commission, Queensland

TNM and Anti-Discrimination Commission, Queensland
(210090; 210322, 31 August 2007) 

s.53 & 54E – Amendment of information – whether information inaccurate or misleading 

The applicant sought to have Anti-Discrimination Tribunal, Queensland (Tribunal), Supreme Court and Federal Court decisions amended by the Anti-Discrimination Commission, Queensland (ADCQ) on the basis of the applicant’s allegation that there had been a breach of privacy in identifying her son and/or the name of his school in the decisions. 

First Assistant Commissioner Rangihaeata was satisfied that the provisions for amendment under the FOI Act did not apply to amendment of decisions by the Tribunal, Supreme Court and Federal Court as the making or amendment of a decision are judicial functions exercised by the relevant Tribunal and Courts and the documents are therefore excluded from the operation of the FOI Act under sections 11(1)(e), (f), (fa) and (fb) of the FOI Act. 

With respect to any copies of the relevant decisions on ADCQ’s files, First Assistant Commissioner Rangihaeata was satisfied that the applicant did not meet the threshold requirements under section 53 of the FOI Act and was therefore not entitled to apply for amendment of the matter in issue. 

s.22(a) – Refusal of access – whether access under another enactment 

The applicant also sought to be provided with copes of audio tapes of relevant Tribunal hearings.  First Assistant Commissioner Rangihaeata was satisfied that the applicant could reasonably get access to the relevant audio tapes under the Recording of Evidence Act 1962 and the ADCQ was entitled to refuse to provide the applicant with copies of the relevant tapes.