Fuchs v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force

Background

1. This matter has a very extended procedural history which is noted in the substantive decision I made on 31 August 2016 (see [2016] NSWCATAD 198] to affirm the decision under review (as amended) of the Respondent, the Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force, in relation to an application made under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 by the Applicant, Mr Alexander Michael Fuchs.
2. The following matters referred to in the earlier decision may here be noted: 1. No later than 27 January 2016 at a planning meeting the Tribunal accepted that the letter sent by the then legal representative of the Applicant on 17 December 2015 would be treated as narrowing the scope of the application. That decision to treat the application as narrowed is one with which the Applicant's lay representative, Dr P Baigent, continues to contest. However, there was no appeal from that decision, the decision was confirmed by a different member of the Tribunal at a planning meeting on 15 February 2016 and as indicated in paragraph [10] of my earlier reasons I did not intend to alter those earlier decisions. It follows that the Applicant's continued complaint about the narrowing of the application is misconceived. 2. The application was heard on the papers with the knowledge and agreement of both parties as is set out in my decision and in the Respondent's submissions of 1 December 2016. 3. My reasons were delivered on 31 August 2016 and set out, as is obvious from their face, the reasons in full for my decision. 4. No appeal has been brought from that decision and an appeal would now be out of time.
3. Rather than appeal, on 25 October 2016, the Applicant filed an application to set aside or vary my decision on the grounds that the decision was made in his absence resulting in the case not being adequately put to the Tribunal within the meaning of reg 9(1)(b) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Regulation 2013 which provides: 1. In addition to any power that is expressly conferred on the Tribunal by the Act or enabling legislation to set aside or vary its decisions, the Tribunal may order that a decision it has made that determines proceedings be set aside or varied in either of the following circumstances: 2. …(b) if the decision was made in the absence of a party and the Tribunal is satisfied that the party's absence has resulted in the party's case not being adequately put to the Tribunal.