Domestic Violence Agencies (Information Sharing) Amendment Act 2024

The Amendment organises the information‑sharing regime around a set of recurring legal concepts. Below are the principal concepts given by the text, with the provision references that define or establish how they operate.

• Protection purpose (s 15): The statutory scope of permissible dealing under Part 3 is limited to a closed list of protection purposes: assessing/establishing whether someone is being or is likely to be subjected to domestic and family violence (an at‑risk person), whether a person of concern is or is likely to engage in such violence, taking action to prevent or reduce the risk, and managing domestic and family violence or suspected domestic and family violence (s 15(a)(i)-(iv)). Information may also be dealt with for purposes provided under Division 3.5 (s 15(b)).

• Information sharing entity (s 14(1)): A defined list of public agencies and bodies are statutory participants: the information sharing coordinator, ACT education providers (Children and Young People Act 2008, s 25(3)), approved education and care service providers, chief police officer, specified commissioners (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People Commissioner; Human Rights Commissioner), the DFVR coordinator, various director‑generals with portfolio responsibilities, licensed childcare proprietors, the public trustee and guardian, and the registrar of firearms. The Minister may add further entities by declaration (s 14(2)) and may specify protection purposes in that declaration (s 14(3)).

• At‑risk person, person of concern and connected person (s 13): An at‑risk person is someone an entity reasonably believes has been, is, or is at risk of being subjected to domestic and family violence; the definition explicitly includes children and young people (s 13). A person of concern is someone an entity reasonably believes has engaged in, is engaging in, or is at risk of engaging in domestic and family violence (s 13). A connected person is a third party who has information relevant to a protection purpose but who is not the at‑risk person or person of concern; the example in s 13 illustrates typical factual patterns.

• Sensitive information and consent (Div 3.6, ss 16AJ-16AP): “Sensitive information” means information or opinion about an identified or reasonably identifiable individual, whether true and whether recorded. The default rule requires consent before dealing with sensitive information about at‑risk adults, young persons and connected people (ss 16AL-16AO), with defined exceptions where dealing without consent is permitted when it is necessary for safety and specific conditions apply (for example, where seeking consent would create risk, the person cannot be located, or failing to deal would cause serious risk) (ss 16AL(3), 16AM(4), 16AN(4), 16AO(3)).

• Relevant ground for non‑disclosure (s 16AA): The statute lists grounds that justify refusing disclosure: if disclosure would contravene s 16 requirements, or could reasonably be expected to endanger life or physical safety, prejudice investigations, coronial inquests or court proceedings, reveal confidential sources used for law enforcement, prejudice lawful methods for preventing/detecting contraventions, contravene court orders, or be contrary to public interest (s 16AA(a)-(b)).

• Information sharing coordinator (ss 16AF-16AH): The Minister may declare an entity to be the coordinator. The coordinator facilitates sharing, identifies and takes appropriate action for protection purposes and may require other information sharing entities to disclose requested information where that coordinator reasonably believes the information is relevant and necessary for a protection purpose; the coordinator must not require disclosure where a relevant ground exists (ss 16AF, 16AG, 16AD).

• Ministerial and entity protocols, and risk assessment and management framework (ss 16AU-16AW, 16AV): The Minister must declare a risk framework (notifiable instrument) and must make Ministerial protocols (notifiable) which may specify consent processes, timeframes, privilege handling, operating requirements, storage and disposal and guidance material. Entities may make entity protocols consistent with Ministerial requirements and must make these publicly accessible (ss 16AU, 16AV, 16AW).

• Notification and disclosure obligations (Div 3.7, ss 16AQ-16AS): Entities must tell at‑risk or connected persons about disclosures or proposed actions that may affect their life, health or safety, including who received the information, when, what nature of information, and outcomes, subject to exceptions where telling would itself create risk, is impracticable, or the person has declined to be told (s 16AQ, 16AR, 16AS). By contrast, an entity must not inform a person of concern that information has been dealt with (s 16AT).

• Limits on secondary use and outside purposes (s 16AI): Information disclosed under this Part must not be used other than for protection purposes except with consent, for serious and urgent threats to life/public health, to comply with specified mandatory reporting obligations (Children and Young People Act s 356; Ombudsman Act reportable conduct), or to the extent prescribed by regulation. The receiving entity must notify the coordinator and the disclosing entity if it uses/discloses shared information for non‑protection purposes (s 16AI(1)-(2)).

• Offences, immunities and protections (ss 16AX, 16AY, 16AZ, 16AZA-16AZB): A new offence captures reckless disclosure or use of shared information by an information holder with a substantial maximum penalty (50 penalty units and/or 6 months imprisonment) (s 16AX). The FOI Act does not apply to information held only because it was disclosed under this part (s 16AZ). The part preserves existing use/derivative use immunities and provides civil/criminal liability protection for public employees acting honestly and without recklessness, with liability shifted to the Territory where applicable (ss 16AY, 16AZA-16AZB).

These concepts interlock: the definition of participants (s 14) sets the legal actors, the protection purpose (s 15) constrains permissible dealing, the consent and notification rules (Divs 3.6-3.7) specify procedural safeguards, Ministerial instruments and the coordinator (ss 16AU-16AW, 16AF-16AH) set governance and compulsion mechanisms, and the offence and immunity provisions (ss 16AX, 16AZA-16AZB) create risk and shielded conduct boundaries.

The Amendment targets three categories of actors and several classes of private or natural persons who are the subject of information.

Primary institutional actors

• Information sharing entities: The Act lists a wide set of public bodies, service providers and officials as statutory participants (s 14(1)). That list expressly includes the information sharing coordinator; ACT education providers and approved education and care service providers; the chief police officer; named statutory commissioners; the DFVR coordinator; various director‑generals with portfolio responsibilities (children and young people, community services, corrective services, disability services, education, emergency services, family safety and support services, health services and facilities including mental health, housing and homelessness services, restorative justice, youth justice, and other services or facilities in relation to at‑risk people or people of concern); licensed childcare proprietors; the public trustee and guardian; the registrar of firearms; and any other entities the Minister declares (s 14(1)(a)-(m), (2)). Entities declared by the Minister are disallowable instruments (s 14(4)), giving the Executive a formal instrument to expand the list.

• Information holders and information sharing coordinator: Anyone who currently or historically exercises functions under this part is an “information holder” when sharing occurs (s 16AX(5) definition). The Minister may declare an information sharing coordinator (s 16AF(1)) who has core facilitation, identification and action functions (ss 16AG, 16AH) and the explicit power to require disclosure by written notice when a requested entity has declined (s 16AD).

Secondary institutional actors

• Minister and Executive: The Minister has statutory power to declare entities (s 14), to make Ministerial protocols that set operational rules and storage/disposal requirements (s 16AV), and to declare the risk assessment and management framework (s 16AU). Ministerial protocols and the risk framework are notifiable instruments; entity declarations are disallowable instruments (ss 16AV(3), 16AU(2), s 14(4)).

• Courts, tribunals and investigative agencies: The text preserves conventions regarding court proceedings and investigatory privilege; relevant grounds allow withholding where disclosure would prejudice a proceeding or contravene orders (s 16AA(b)(vi)-(vii)). The Criminal Code applies to offences against the Act (s 3A).

Individuals and categories of persons

• At‑risk persons: People who an information sharing entity reasonably believes have been, are, or are at risk of being subjected to domestic and family violence, explicitly including children and young people (s 13). The Act imposes special consent, notification and decision‑making duties when the subject is an at‑risk person (ss 16(2), 16AL-16AN, 16AQ-16AR).

• Persons of concern: Those who an entity reasonably believes have engaged in, are engaging in, or at risk of engaging in domestic and family violence (s 13). The Act expressly prohibits telling a person of concern that information has been dealt with (s 16AT) and forbids seeking their consent regarding sensitive information about them (s 16AP(1)).

• Connected persons: Persons who have information relevant to a protection purpose but who are neither the at‑risk person nor the person of concern (s 13). They are entitled to consent protections and must be told about disclosures in many situations (ss 16AO, 16AQ).

Who pays and who makes choices

• Who pays: The Act does not create new funding lines in itself, but implementation will impose operational costs on information sharing entities required to adopt protocols, training, recordkeeping, and to respond to coordinator notices. The Territory is assigned civil liability that would otherwise attach to a public employee acting under the part (s 16AZA(2)), which transfers potential financial exposure for litigation to the Territory rather than to individual public employees.

• Who decides: Day‑to‑day decisions about disclosure, consent, notification and necessity for protection purposes rest with each information sharing entity and their officers who “reasonably believe” (s 16AB(1), 16AC(2)). The Minister decides which additional entities participate and the content of Ministerial protocols and the risk framework (s 14(2), ss 16AU-16AV). The coordinator has an oversight and compulsion role for individual disputes about disclosures (s 16AD), and can take or coordinate action in relation to disclosed information (s 16AH).

Behavioural consequences

• Entities named face a statutory obligation to share information in defined circumstances (s 16AC requires disclosure when requested and criteria are met), and must follow national/ministerial frameworks and protocols (s 16(1)(b), ss 16AV-16AW). The statutory duty to prioritise safety (s 12) and consent default rules will push entities to formalise consent‑seeking processes and support arrangements (ss 12, 16AL(2), 16AM(3), 16AN(3), 16AO(2)). The coordinator’s ability to compel disclosure (s 16AD) reduces the ability of entities to refuse requests where the coordinator is satisfied disclosure is necessary and a relevant ground is absent.

Geographic and sectoral reach

• The Act reaches a wide swathe of public service and service providers in the ACT, education and early childhood sectors, policing, health, housing, community services and children services. The Minister’s power to add entities by declaration creates a mechanism to expand reach beyond the listed actors (s 14(2)-(3)).

In short, the Amendment embeds statutory duties and discretion among named public agencies and services, creates a central coordinating power with limited compulsion, and places procedural protections around consent, notification and privileged material. The primary effects fall on public agencies and regulated service providers who will need to operationalise protocols, and on individuals who are the subject of information sharing (at‑risk people, connected persons and persons of concern).

This Part sets a network of statutory duties (what entities must do), conditional rights (what subjects can expect), and governance processes that allocate discretion and accountability. Below are the principal duties and rights with their statutory anchors.

Key duties on information sharing entities

• Limit dealing to protection purposes: Entities must not deal with information under Part 3 other than to the extent necessary for a protection purpose (s 15). This is the substantive boundary for information handling.

• Observe consent rules for sensitive information: Entities must not deal with sensitive information about at‑risk adults, young people, children or connected people without consent, except where statutory exceptions apply (ss 16AL-16AO). In seeking consent, entities must provide reasonable support to enable the person to make and communicate their decision (s 16AL(2), 16AM(3), 16AN(3), 16AO(2)).

• Comply with risk framework and protocols: Entities must comply with requirements for dealing with information under any risk assessment and management framework, Ministerial protocol, and relevant entity protocol (s 16(1)(b)). Ministerial protocols can specify detailed operational rules, including consent practices, timeframes, privilege handling and storage/disposal (s 16AV).

• Share when requested unless a relevant ground exists: Under s 16AC, an entity must disclose requested information if it reasonably believes the information is relevant to the requesting entity’s functions and disclosure is necessary for a protection purpose, unless a “relevant ground” for not disclosing exists (s 16AA lists those grounds). If an entity refuses to disclose, it must notify the information sharing coordinator in writing with the name of the requesting entity, nature of the information requested and the relevant ground for refusal (s 16AC(4)).

• Disclose when required by the coordinator: If a requested entity does not disclose, the coordinator may require disclosure by written notice if the coordinator reasonably believes the information is relevant and necessary for a protection purpose; the coordinator must not require disclosure if satisfied a relevant ground exists (s 16AD). The entity must comply with such a notice (s 16AD(4)).

• Provide notifications to at‑risk and connected persons: Entities must inform at‑risk and connected persons when information about them is disclosed for protection purposes, including who received the information, when, what it was, and any outcomes, unless the person has declined in writing, another entity already told them, it is not practicable, or telling would cause risk to life, health or safety (s 16AQ(2)-(3)). There are comparable obligations to inform about proposed actions that may create risk (s 16AR) and for non‑protection purpose uses where no consent exists (s 16AS).

• Maintain public entity protocols: Entities may prepare entity protocols but these must not be inconsistent with the risk framework or Ministerial protocol, and must be publicly available at their offices or on their website (s 16AW).

• Storage, disposal and recordkeeping: Ministerial protocols may set requirements for storing, managing and disposing of information after it is no longer necessary for a protection purpose (s 16AV(2)(b)-(c)) and entity protocols must align (s 16AW).

Key statutory rights and protections for individuals

• Consent and support: At‑risk adults and young people have a statutory right to be asked for consent before sensitive information about them is dealt with, and to be provided with reasonable support to make and communicate consent decisions (ss 16AL(1)-(2), 16AM(2)-(3)).

• Parental consent for children and certain young people: For children (under 14) and young people who lack sufficient decision‑making ability, entities must obtain consent from a person with parental responsibility except where the statutory safety exceptions apply; entities must not contact persons of concern in seeking consent (s 16AN(1)-(5)).

• Notification rights: At‑risk persons and connected persons have a right to be told about disclosures and certain uses of their information and proposed protective actions, subject to limited safety and practicability exceptions (ss 16AQ-16AS).

• Protection from disclosure to persons of concern: Entities must not tell a person of concern that information has been dealt with under this Part (s 16AT). Also, the statute forbids seeking consent from a person of concern (s 16AP(1)).

• Immunities and shifted liability: Public employees acting honestly and without recklessness in exercising functions under the Part are not civilly liable and any civil liability is instead attached to the Territory (s 16AZA(1)-(2)). More generally, dealing with information honestly and without recklessness does not attract civil or criminal liability, nor is it a breach of confidence, professional etiquette or rules of professional conduct (s 16AZB).

Duties and constraints on disclosure outside protection purposes

• Use/disclosure for other purposes requires consent or fit within listed exceptions: Section 16AI restricts secondary uses; uses or disclosures outside protection purposes require consent, or must be to reduce serious and urgent threats to life/public health, to comply with specified mandatory reporting duties, or be otherwise required/allowed by prescribed territory law (s 16AI(1)(a)-(d)). Where such non‑protection disclosures happen, the receiving entity must notify the information sharing coordinator and the disclosing entity (s 16AI(2)).

Offences and evidentiary burdens

• Reckless disclosure or use offence: An information holder who recklessly discloses or uses shared information about a “protected person” commits an offence with a specified maximum penalty, unless an exception applies (s 16AX). The note in s 16AX(3) indicates the defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the exceptions listed.

Procedural duties and instruments

• Instruments: Declarations of entities, the coordinator and entity protocols are statutorily regulated as disallowable or notifiable instruments (ss 14(4), 16AU(2), 16AV(3)). Those instruments create accountability pathways (legislative scrutiny for disallowable instruments; notification for notifiable ones).

Rights to review and oversight

• Independent review requirement: The Minister must commission an independent review of the operation of Part 3 after the second year of operation and present a report to the Legislative Assembly within 12 months after the review starts; that review provision expires after four years (s 16AZC).

These duties and rights create compliance obligations on named entities and procedural protections for individuals, while assigning central governance and compulsion powers to the Minister and the information sharing coordinator.

The Amendment creates a mix of criminal exposure, administrative compulsion, instrument oversight and civil protections. Enforcement levers include criminal offences, statutory compulsion, and governance via Ministerial and entity protocols and the risk framework.

Criminal offences and penalties

• Reckless disclosure and use offence: Section 16AX establishes two distinct criminal offences for information holders engaged in the handling of “shared information” about a “protected person”:

  • Recklessly disclosing shared information (s 16AX(1)): An information holder commits an offence if they do something that discloses shared information about someone else (a protected person), and the information holder is reckless both as to whether the information is shared information about the protected person and as to whether doing the thing would result in the information being disclosed to someone else. Maximum penalty: 50 penalty units, imprisonment for 6 months, or both.

  • Recklessly using shared information (s 16AX(2)): An information holder commits an offence if they use shared information about a protected person and are reckless as to whether the information is shared information about the protected person. Maximum penalty: 50 penalty units, imprisonment for 6 months, or both.

• Exceptions and evidential burden: Subsection 16AX(3) enumerates exceptions where the criminal offence does not apply: disclosures or uses that occur in the exercise of a function under the Part, disclosures required in court proceedings, disclosures with the protected person’s consent, or disclosures to the chief police officer in connection with a possible domestic and family violence offence. The note in s 16AX(3) refers to evidential burden on the defendant under the Criminal Code (see Criminal Code, s 58), meaning the defendant must adduce or point to evidence supporting the exception.

General application of Criminal Code

• The Act explicitly confirms that the Criminal Code applies to all offences against this Act (s 3A). That brings in general principles of criminal responsibility, burdens of proof, and defences contained in the Code (s 3A notes).

Administrative compulsion and non‑criminal enforcement

• Coordinator’s compulsory notices: The information sharing coordinator can issue a written notice requiring an information sharing entity to disclose information requested under s 16AC, where the coordinator reasonably believes the information is relevant to the requesting entity’s functions and necessary for a protection purpose (s 16AD(2)). The coordinator must not require disclosure if satisfied a relevant ground for non‑disclosure exists (s 16AD(3)). The recipient entity must comply with the notice (s 16AD(4)). This creates an administrative enforcement mechanism separate from criminal sanctions.

Instrument scrutiny and ministerial powers

• Disallowable and notifiable instruments: Ministerial declarations that add entities and state protection purposes are disallowable instruments (s 14(4)), subject to Assembly disallowance. The Minister’s risk framework and Ministerial protocols are notifiable instruments (ss 16AU(2), 16AV(3)). These statutory instrument classifications create different parliamentary oversight routes which can be used to challenge scope and content.

Civil liability and indemnities

• Public employee indemnity: Section 16AZA provides that a public employee is not civilly liable for conduct engaged in honestly and without recklessness in the exercise of a function under this Part or in the reasonable belief that the conduct was such. Any civil liability that would otherwise attach to the public employee attaches instead to the Territory (s 16AZA(2)). The provision shifts financial liability for honest, non‑reckless conduct by public employees from individuals to the Territory.

• Broader protection: Section 16AZB clarifies that civil or criminal liability is not incurred solely because a person deals with information as permitted under this part, honestly and without recklessness. It also says such dealing is not a breach of confidence, professional etiquette, ethics, or rules of professional conduct. These are protective shields designed to reduce risk of defensive practice, subject to the “honestly and without recklessness” threshold.

Interaction with other legal processes

• Privilege and court proceedings: Section 16AA sets out relevant grounds for not disclosing where disclosure could prejudice a proceeding in a court or tribunal or contravene an order. Section 16AX(3)(b) and the note to s 16AX(3) indicate that disclosures required in relation to court proceedings are exceptions to the criminal offence created in s 16AX.

• FOI exclusion: Section 16AZ excludes information from Freedom of Information release where it is held by an information sharing entity only because it was disclosed under this part. That limits public transparency remedies for certain records.

Reporting and review

• Reporting requirement on coordinator refusal: If an entity refuses to disclose when asked (s 16AC(3)), it must tell the information sharing coordinator in writing, including the name of the requester, the nature of the information, and the relevant ground for refusal (s 16AC(4)). That reporting requirement creates a paper trail for oversight and potential administrative action.

• Review of the Part: The Minister must arrange for an independent review of the operation of Part 3 as soon as practicable after the end of its second year of operation and present the review report to the Assembly within 12 months after the review starts (s 16AZC). This creates a mandated opportunity for evaluation and potential legislative or administrative response, and the review provision itself expires after 4 years.

Enforcement balance

• The legislative design couples an administrative compulsion mechanism (coordinator’s notice power) and instrument‑based governance (Ministerial protocols, risk framework) with criminal sanctions limited to reckless disclosure or use and civil protections for honest, non‑reckless conduct (ss 16AD, 16AV, 16AU, 16AX, 16AZA-16AZB). That structure creates both sticks (criminal exposure, compulsion) and shields (immunities, liability transfer to the Territory) for those operating in the scheme.

Practically, enforcement will depend on how the coordinator uses its power to require disclosure, how Ministerial protocols specify timeframes and obligations, whether administrative discretion is subject to internal review, and whether criminal prosecutions for recklessness are pursued. The Act itself provides the main enforcement powers and immunities, and vests the Minister and coordinator with central administrative roles.

The Amendment situates the Part 3 regime within the broader ACT legal framework by signposting and preserving interactions with several Territory laws, and by asserting primacy or exemptions in specified contexts.

Explicit cross‑references and preserved immunities

• Criminal Code applies to offences against this Act: Section 3A states that the Criminal Code, ch 2 applies to all offences against this Act, invoking general principles of criminal responsibility and defences from the Code. This means elements like burdens of proof, recklessness and evidential burdens are governed by the Criminal Code’s rules.

• Relationship with Freedom of Information Act 2016: The Amendment excludes information from FOI where the information is held by an information sharing entity only because it was disclosed under Part 3 (s 16AZ). That limits FOI as a route to access records created solely through sharing under the new regime.

• Continuation of use and derivative use immunities: Section 16AY expressly preserves any use or derivative use immunity that applies to information obtained, directly or indirectly, due to a law applying in the ACT. The text lists examples from other Acts (e.g. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People Commissioner Act 2022, s 33(2); Human Rights Commission Act 2005, s 75(4); Integrity Commission Act 2018, s 176). This clause recognises and protects pre‑existing statutory immunities for information used in particular investigatory or oversight contexts.

• Mandatory reporting and reportable conduct: Section 16AI(1)(c) confirms that disclosure or use of information under this part is permitted (and in some respects required) to the extent necessary to comply with mandatory reporting obligations under the Children and Young People Act 2008, s 356, and reportable conduct obligations under the Ombudsman Act 1989, division 2.2A. This ensures that protections for children and obligations for reportable conduct are preserved.

Privileges and legal proceedings

• Privilege against self‑incrimination and client legal privilege: Section 16AA’s note references the Legislation Act ss 170 and 171 regarding the application of privilege against self‑incrimination and client legal privilege. Section 16AV(2)(a)(vi) lists compliance with privileges and use/derivative use immunities as matters the Ministerial protocol may address, thereby signalling intent to preserve common law and statutory privileges in operations.

• Court and tribunal proceedings: The “relevant ground” for refusal includes prejudice to proceedings, contravening court orders, and other court‑sensitive considerations (s 16AA(b)(vi)-(vii)). The Act therefore provides a basis for refusing to disclose where such legal process concerns exist.

Interaction with family violence regime and definition signposts

• Family Violence Act 2016 definitions: The dictionary signposts definitions to the Family Violence Act 2016 for terms such as “family member” (Dictionary, family member,see the Family Violence Act 2016, s 9) and “domestic and family violence” (Dictionary, domestic and family violence,see the Family Violence Act 2016, s 8). That linkage aligns Part 3’s concepts with the existing definition framework for family violence in the Territory.

Children and parental responsibility laws

• Children and Young People Act 2008 and parental responsibility: The Amendment references the Children and Young People Act 2008 for defined classes (for example, ACT education provider, and the definition of person with parental responsibility in s 16AN(6)). It also preserves the mandatory reporting duty under that Act as an exception to use restrictions (s 16AI(1)(c)(i)).

Administrative law and instrument oversight

• Disallowable and notifiable instruments: Declarations that nominate information sharing entities or the coordinator are disallowable instruments (s 14(4), s 16AF(2)). The risk assessment and management framework and Ministerial protocols are notifiable instruments (ss 16AU(2), 16AV(3)). That placement provides different parliamentary oversight mechanisms and potential judicial review routes for those instruments.

Operational intersections and records law

• Storage and disposal requirements: Ministerial protocols may specify requirements for storage, management and disposal of information disclosed under Part 3 (s 16AV(2)(b)). This will interact with any existing territory records retention, archives or privacy laws and internal recordkeeping regimes.

Privacy and confidentiality regimes

• Non‑binding of other laws: The Amendment notes that other laws may restrict dealing with information under this part (e.g. restrictions on sharing information about who makes a report under Children and Young People Act s 857), and directs practitioners to take account of those external constraints (s 16AI note). The Act therefore presumes parallel operation with privacy, confidentiality and reporting statutes.

In short, the Amendment is designed to operate as an overlaying information‑sharing mechanism that explicitly preserves core obligations and immunities in other Territory laws (Criminal Code, Children and Young People Act, Ombudsman Act, Family Violence Act definitions), limits FOI for information held only because it was disclosed under the Part, and ties operational detail to Ministerial protocols and a risk framework which are themselves instruments that must be read alongside other applicable statutes.

The Amendment Act of 2024 makes multiple targeted changes to the Domestic Violence Agencies Act 1986. The text provided is the full Amendment Act, which both inserts new provisions and updates existing language. The following is a breakdown of the mechanical amendments recorded in the Act, with references to the Amendment’s own sections.

Major insertions and new parts

• New Part 3 inserted: The Act inserts an entire Part 3 titled “Information sharing between certain entities” (s 7). That Part contains Divisions 3.1-3.8 which set out purpose, definitions, information sharing requirements, coordinator provisions, consent rules, protocols, offences, immunities and review provisions (ss 11-16AZC).

• New sections 3A and 3B added to Part 1: Section 3A confirms the application of the Criminal Code to offences under the Act, and s 3B sets out the objects of the Act, including prevention of domestic and family violence and promotion of safety (s 5).

Substantive amendments to existing sections

• Section 18 replaced: Section 18 of the principal Act is substituted with a new provision permitting a police officer or AFP staff member to disclose information to an approved crisis support organisation where the officer suspects on reasonable grounds that a family violence offence has been, is being or is likely to be committed in relation to a person; disclosure is limited to information likely to aid the organisation in rendering assistance (s 10).

• Dictionary and definitional updates: The Amendment revises the Dictionary at the end of the Act extensively. It substitutes the Note 1 to s 2, inserts a range of new dictionary entries (including at-risk person, connected person, entity protocol, disclose, information, information sharing coordinator/entity, person of concern, protection purpose, sensitive information, etc.) and changes the definition of “child” to mean a person under 14 years old, with “young person” defined as 14-17 (ss 4, 11-18). It also aligns terminology to “domestic and family violence” in multiple places (ss 6, 19-20).

Terminology harmonisation

• Replaces repeated phraseology “domestic violence and family violence” with a single term “domestic and family violence” in multiple provisions and cross references across the principal Act (s 6, s 19-20). This is an editorial and conceptual harmonisation that aligns earlier drafting with the new Part 3 language.

Powers for executive instruments

• Ministerial declaration powers: The Act gives the Minister the power to declare additional information sharing entities and the information sharing coordinator, and to declare protection purposes for restricted entities (s 14(2)-(3), s 16AF(1)). Declarations are disallowable instruments (s 14(4), s 16AF(2)).

• Instrument classification: The Act specifies that Ministerial protocols and the risk assessment and management framework are notifiable instruments (ss 16AV(3), 16AU(2)), while entity protocols must be publicly available (s 16AW(3)).

Offence and protection additions

• New offences for reckless disclosure/use: Section 16AX creates criminal offences for information holders who recklessly disclose or use shared information about protected persons, with specified maximum penalties and enumerated exceptions (s 7, Div 3.8).

• Public employee and general liability protections: Sections 16AZA and 16AZB provide civil liability protection for public employees and general shields for persons dealing with information honestly and without recklessness, with liability assigned to the Territory when appropriate (s 7, Div 3.8).

Review and sunset provisions

• Review timing and expiry: Section 16AZC mandates an independent review as soon as practicable after the end of the second year of operation and obliges the Minister to present the review to the Legislative Assembly within 12 months of commencing the review. The review provision expires 4 years after commencement (s 16AZC).

Other textual and cross‑reference corrections

• Various amendments update cross‑references and signpost definitions to the Family Violence Act 2016 and other Territory laws (e.g. family member,see Family Violence Act 2016, s 9). The Amendment explicitly notes that examples and signpost definitions refer to other instruments and Acts (s 4).

Administrative formalities

• Commencement: The Amendment provides for commencement by written notice from the Minister, with an automatic commencement if not commenced within 12 months of notification; it also disapplies the Legislation Act’s automatic commencement of postponed law (s 2).

• Presentation and notification: The endnotes record presentation of the bill and its notification under the Legislation Act (Endnotes 1-2).

This Amendment therefore chiefly expands the principal Act by inserting a substantive information‑sharing regime supported by a governance architecture of Ministerial protocols, risk frameworks and a coordinator role, while making definitional and textual updates across the Act.

The text of the Amendment Act as provided contains no citations to judicial decisions or litigation history. It includes endnotes that record the presentation speech and notification dates (Endnotes 1-2), but it does not record any court challenges, case law, or precedent arising from the new Part 3. In other words, the Amendment itself is newly enacted and the provided document does not report any litigation.

What the text does provide relevant to future litigation

• Instrumental oversight: Several elements of the Amendment will be the likely subjects of future judicial or administrative review once they are operational. These include disallowable instruments (declarations of entities and coordinator under ss 14(4), 16AF(2)), notifiable instruments (risk framework and Ministerial protocols under ss 16AU(2) and 16AV(3)), and any written notices issued by the information sharing coordinator under s 16AD. The statutory instrument classifications create routes for Assembly scrutiny and may create opportunities for judicial review on standard public law grounds (ultra vires, procedural unfairness, Wednesbury unreasonableness), although the Act itself does not specify internal review mechanisms for coordinator notices.

• Evidentiary burdens in offences: Section 16AX’s note flags an evidential burden under the Criminal Code for exceptions to the reckless disclosure/use offence. If prosecuted, matters such as whether an accused acted honestly or without recklessness, or whether a disclosure falls within an exception, will raise mixed fact and law questions likely to be litigated under normal criminal procedures.

• Privilege and confidentiality overlaps: Section 16AA identifies a range of “relevant grounds” tied to investigative and legal process privilege (prejudice to an investigation, coronial inquest, or a court proceeding). Determinations about whether disclosure would prejudice proceedings or reveal confidential sources could be contested and litigated when entities decline to disclose and the coordinator seeks to require disclosure (s 16AD), or where an entity refuses and reports its refusal in writing (s 16AC(4)).

• FOI and record classification: The explicit exclusion of information held only because it was disclosed under the part from the Freedom of Information Act (s 16AZ) may generate litigation over the scope of that exclusion, in particular whether records are held “only because” of Part 3 disclosure, or whether parallel records create FOI obligations.

• Statutory interpretation of “reasonably believes” and “necessary for a protection purpose”: Many of the duties and powers in the Part hinge on an entity or the coordinator’s “reasonable belief” that information is relevant and disclosure is necessary for a protection purpose (see ss 16AB(1), 16AC(2), 16AD(2)). Judicial review or criminal proceedings may require courts to interpret the standard of reasonableness, necessity and proportionality in defined contexts.

No cases named in the Amendment

• The provided text does not name any cases; accordingly, the Amendment does not incorporate or rely upon judicial authority in its text. Any future litigation will therefore be generated by operational disputes arising under the Part.

In practice, given the newness of the regime, litigation history will build only after implementation instruments (Ministerial protocols, risk framework), coordinator declarations and notices, and real‑world disputes about refusals to disclose, alleged reckless disclosures and use, FOI claims, or civil claims are initiated.

A number of practical pitfalls follow directly from the statutory design and language. These are the points where operational practice may commonly diverge from legal expectation, or where compliance failures could have legal consequences.

1. FOI exclusion is narrow but potentially surprising (s 16AZ)

   • The Freedom of Information Act does not apply to information to the extent it is held by an information sharing entity only because it was disclosed under Part 3. That may exclude certain records from public access while leaving others accessible. Practitioners must track whether records are held for other reasons, or whether copies outside the Part’s sharing are FOI‑accessible.

2. The coordinator can compel disclosure, but only within limits (s 16AD)

   • If an entity refuses to disclose, the coordinator can require it to do so by written notice when the coordinator reasonably believes the information is relevant and necessary for a protection purpose. The coordinator, however, cannot require disclosure if it is satisfied that a relevant ground exists (s 16AD(3)). Entities refusing disclosure must report the refusal to the coordinator in writing with stated reasons (s 16AC(4)). The interplay of these mechanics means a refusal that is not supported by a listed “relevant ground” can be overturned administratively.

3. “Relevant ground” is broad and fact‑sensitive (s 16AA)

   • Grounds for non‑disclosure include endangering life, prejudicing investigations or proceedings, revealing confidential sources, or being contrary to public interest. These grounds are fact‑intensive. Entities declining disclosure must articulate and document the specific ground in writing (s 16AC(4)), and the coordinator will assess whether the ground exists.

4. Consent defaults, but with important safety exceptions (Div 3.6)

   • The default position for sensitive information is consent. However, the Act permits non‑consensual dealing where necessary for safety and where seeking consent would cause risk, the person cannot be located, or failing to deal would cause serious risk (ss 16AL(3), 16AM(4), 16AN(4), 16AO(3)). Entities must document the factual basis for invoking these exceptions , the statutory language requires the entity “reasonably believes” those conditions obtain.

5. Must not seek consent from a person of concern (s 16AP)

   • Entities must not seek consent of a person of concern in relation to sensitive information about them. This is a constraint on common practice where consent of all parties might otherwise be sought; instead, the Act contemplates unilateral handling in respect of people of concern.

6. Notification obligations interact with safety exceptions (ss 16AQ-16AS)

   • Entities must tell at‑risk and connected persons about disclosures and proposed actions unless doing so would cause risk to life, health or safety, is impracticable, another entity already told them, or they asked not to be told (ss 16AQ(3)). Operationally, entities must balance transparency obligations with safety; misjudging that balance risks causing harm or breaching statutory duties.

7. Recklessness criminal offence requires attention to “shared information” status (s 16AX)

   • The criminal offence applies to information holders with reckless awareness that the information is shared information about a protected person and that disclosure or use would result in dissemination. Entities must maintain clear records that material is “shared information” and the permissions under which it was received and used. Accidental or unconscious crossing of boundaries could risk criminal liability if recklessness can be established.

8. Liability protections hinge on honesty and absence of recklessness (ss 16AZA-16AZB)

   • The protection for public employees and others applies only where conduct is “honest and without recklessness.” This is a high‑stakes factual standard. Entities should carefully document decision rationales to support later claims of honest non‑reckless conduct.

9. Instrumental governance concentrates discretion with the Minister and coordinator (ss 14, 16AF, 16AV)

   • The Minister decides which additional entities participate and what protocols and frameworks govern operations; the coordinator can compel disclosure. Collectively, this creates centralised decision points that will determine practical scope. Entities and practitioners need to monitor declarations, Ministerial protocols and the risk framework as they will materially affect duties and rights.

10. Parental responsibility and children’s consent traps (s 16AN)

    • For children under 14 and certain young persons lacking decision‑making ability, consent must be sought from a person with parental responsibility, but the entity must not contact a person of concern when seeking that consent (s 16AN(5)). In cases where the only available relevant adult is the person of concern, the statutory restriction requires a careful approach and may compel reliance on the safety exceptions.

11. Records and disposal obligations will be specified by Ministerial protocol (s 16AV(2)(b))

    • Ministerial protocols may set disposal periods and processes. Until those instruments are published, entities lack statutory clarity on retention. Practitioners must track the instruments and align their records management accordingly.

12. Where two legal duties collide (e.g. privilege vs. information sharing), the Act expects protocols to manage compliance (s 16AV(2)(a)(vi))

    • The Ministerial protocol may set out how to reconcile privilege, self‑incrimination and use/derivative use immunities (s 16AV(2)(a)(vi)). In ambiguous cases, entities should seek legal advice before disclosure; failure to consider privilege could create legal exposure.

13. Impact on third parties and service providers

    • Schools, approved childcare providers, and care services are included as information sharing entities (s 14(1)(b)-(c), (j)). These entities must make operational decisions about consent, notification and privacy, potentially without prior sectoral experience. Training and policy adjustments will be necessary.

14. Review deadlines and expiry of the review provision (s 16AZC)

    • The mandatory independent review must be arranged after the end of the 2nd year of operation and the review provision expires after 4 years. Stakeholders should note that the statutory review window is time‑limited.

Each “gotcha” above flows from a specific statutory clause. Entities should adopt formal procedures to document decisions under the thresholds “reasonably believes,” “necessary for a protection purpose,” and “honest and without recklessness,” given that legal liability, coordinator compulsion, and criminal exposure all turn on those factual assessments.

This section gives a practicable, source‑grounded compliance checklist and suggested operational steps for entities that are information sharing entities or may be declared such. All references are to the Amendment Act provisions.

1. Establish legal status and obligations

   • Confirm whether your organisation is an information sharing entity under s 14(1) or has been declared by the Minister (s 14(2)). If declared, obtain and retain a copy of the disallowable instrument establishing that status (s 14(4)).
   • If uncertain, consult the Ministerial declarations and the list in s 14(1), and check whether your entity has any portfolio responsibilities listed in s 14(1)(i).

2. Review and align with the Ministerial protocol and risk framework

   • The Minister must declare a risk assessment and management framework (s 16AU) and make Ministerial protocols (s 16AV). These instruments set mandatory operational rules such as timeframes, consent processes, privilege handling and storage/disposal requirements (s 16AV(2)). Do not wait; obtain, read and integrate these instruments into operational policies as soon as they are published.

3. Prepare and publish an entity protocol

   • Draft an entity protocol consistent with the Ministerial protocol and risk framework (s 16AW(2)). Make it available for inspection at your office or publish it on your website (s 16AW(3)). The protocol should define who may give or receive information on behalf of the entity, decision processes for consent and disclosure, recordkeeping steps, and engagement points with the information sharing coordinator.

4. Train nominated officers and frontline staff

   • Train staff on core concepts: protection purpose (s 15), at‑risk person/person of concern/connected person definitions (s 13), sensitive information definition (s 16AK), consent rules (ss 16AL-16AO), relevant grounds for non‑disclosure (s 16AA) and the offence for reckless disclosure/use (s 16AX).
   • Ensure staff understand the “reasonably believes” standard and how to document it factually.

5. Consent procedures and supports

   • For sensitive information, require documented consent where necessary, and provide reasonable support to help people make and communicate decisions (ss 16AL(2), 16AM(3), 16AN(3), 16AO(2)). Support may include offering a support person or additional time, as the Act’s examples suggest.
   • For children and certain young persons, ensure consent is obtained from a person with parental responsibility where applicable, and never contact a person of concern when seeking that parental consent (s 16AN(2), (5)).

6. Decision documentation and recordkeeping

   • Maintain contemporaneous records whenever dealing with sensitive or shared information, including the factual basis for any exceptions relied upon (e.g. inability to contact, risk if consent sought, necessity for safety) (ss 16AL(3), 16AM(4), 16AN(4), 16AO(3)).
   • Where disclosure is refused, document the relevant ground and notify the information sharing coordinator in writing listing the name of the requesting entity, the nature of the information requested, and the ground for refusal (s 16AC(4)).

7. Responding to requests and coordinator notices

   • When asked to disclose information for a protection purpose, assess relevance and necessity and either disclose (s 16AC(2)) or, if refusing, notify the coordinator (s 16AC(4)). If you receive a coordinator’s written notice requiring disclosure, comply unless the coordinator is satisfied a relevant ground exists; the entity must comply with the notice (s 16AD(4)).

8. Notification to subjects

   • When you disclose information about an at‑risk or connected person for a protection purpose, tell them the name of the recipient entity, when it was disclosed, the nature of the information and any outcomes, unless an exception applies (s 16AQ(2)-(3)). For proposed actions that may cause risk, tell the person and the risk unless an exception applies (s 16AR). For non‑protection uses disclosed without consent, provide similar notice under s 16AS unless exceptions apply.

9. Avoid contacting persons of concern about disclosures or seeking their consent

   • Do not tell a person of concern that information has been dealt with under this Part (s 16AT) and do not seek their consent to deal with sensitive information (s 16AP(1)). That is an explicit statutory prohibition.

10. Data security, storage and disposal

    • Align records retention, storage and disposal with requirements set out in the Ministerial protocol (s 16AV(2)(b)). Until the Ministerial protocol specifies these, adopt conservative practices that limit retention to necessary periods and secure access, and anticipate disposal or deletion procedures.

11. Handling of legal privilege and court processes

    • If disclosure may prejudice a court or tribunal proceeding, coronial inquest or an investigation, or reveal a confidential law‑enforcement source, treat those as “relevant grounds” and consult legal counsel before disclosing (s 16AA). Capture and preserve the grounds in writing in any refusal communication to the coordinator where applicable (s 16AC(4)).

12. Use for non‑protection purposes

    • Do not use or disclose shared information for purposes other than protection purposes except with consent or where another statutory exception applies (e.g., mandatory reporting under Children and Young People Act s 356 or Ombudsman Act reportable conduct) or as prescribed by regulation (s 16AI). Where such use occurs, notify the information sharing coordinator and the disclosing entity in writing (s 16AI(2)).

13. Criminal risk mitigation

    • Implement internal review and senior sign‑off for decisions that could expose staff to the criminal offence in s 16AX (reckless disclosure/use). Train staff on what constitutes recklessness and ensure that disclosures and uses are documented as reasonable, necessary and in compliance with protocols.

14. Insurance and civil liability

    • Be aware that public employee civil liability shifts to the Territory for honest, non‑reckless conduct (s 16AZA(2)). That does not obviate the need for documentation to evidence honesty and absence of recklessness. Where your organisation is not a public entity, review indemnity arrangements and liability insurance in light of sharing obligations.

15. Monitor instruments and review obligations

    • Track the Ministerial protocol, risk framework, entity protocols, any disallowable instruments and the timing of the independent review (s 16AZC). The review after year 2 may alter operational expectations.

16. Public transparency and community engagement

    • Because entity protocols must be publicly available (s 16AW(3)), prepare accessible public guidance explaining how your organisation handles requests, what consent processes look like, and what rights subjects have to be told about disclosures, while balancing safety exceptions.

17. Legal advice and escalation

    • For borderline cases,complex privilege intersections, potential prejudice to criminal proceedings, or where the coordinator issues a compulsory notice,seek legal advice promptly and document the legal reasoning supporting your action.

This checklist follows the statutory architecture. The consistent theme is opportunity and risk: entities have enabling powers to share information for protection purposes, but they must do so within a framework of consent, documentation, protocols and safety assessments that the Act mandates. Robust written records, staff training, published entity protocols and a clear escalation path to legal counsel and to the information sharing coordinator are the practical essentials for compliance.