Authorises the South Australian Auditor‑General to investigate and report on dealings relating to the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium, including matters involving non‑public bodies, and requires a report by 31 October 2001 that must be published. It gives the Auditor‑General wide procedural discretion and immunity for honest acts, shortens or limits judicial challenges to the Inquiry, and prohibits public funding for related legal costs after 27 July 2001. Affects people and organisations examined by the Inquiry, public fund administrators and courts.
Mechanically, the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium (Auditor‑General’s Report) Act 2001 authorises and frames a time‑limited inquiry by the Auditor‑General into dealings relating to the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium Redevelopment Project. The Act does four concrete things.
First, it creates the Inquiry as an Auditor‑General examination requested by the Treasurer (the Act’s definition of Inquiry, s 3). Second, it expressly authorises the Auditor‑General to undertake the Inquiry and to exercise broad investigatory powers, including power to make findings of fact and law and to make findings as to the conduct of any person (s 4(1)-(4)). The Act declares that the Inquiry is an examination under section 32 of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987 and that the Auditor‑General may exercise powers under that Act in relation to the Inquiry (s 4(3)(a), (c)). It also expressly allows the Auditor‑General to examine matters that are not limited to publicly funded bodies (s 4(3)(b)). The Auditor‑General may conduct the Inquiry in such manner as the Auditor‑General thinks fit and may set time limits and other requirements, with power to take steps in the event of non‑compliance (s 4(4)(a)-(b)).
Third, the Act fixes a statutory deadline for a report: the Auditor‑General must prepare and deliver a report on the Inquiry by 31 October 2001 and must deliver copies to the Treasurer and the Presiding Officers of the two Houses by that date (s 5(1)-(2)). The Presiding Officers must cause the report to be published, and, when so published, the report is to be taken for the purposes of any other Act or law as a parliamentary report published under the authority of both Houses (s 5(3)-(4)). The Act further requires the Auditor‑General to prepare and deliver the report even if the report is only a draft, or the Inquiry is incomplete, or aspects remain uncompleted (s 5(5)).
Fourth, the Act significantly restricts court remedies and limits litigation timetables in relation to acts or omissions by the Auditor‑General in connection with the Inquiry. It imposes short limitation periods for commencing proceedings (14 days after the prescribed date , the date of assent , for pre‑assent acts; 14 days after the act or omission for post‑assent acts) and bars proceedings that would prevent the Auditor‑General preparing, continuing to prepare, or delivering the report (s 6(1)-(4)). Courts are required to take Parliament’s stated intention and desire for a comprehensive report by 31 October 2001 into account when hearing such proceedings (s 6(5)). The Act also prevents public funds being applied to legal costs incurred after 27 July 2001 in relation to proceedings about acts or omissions of the Auditor‑General, except where funds are applied by the Auditor‑General or by the court (s 6(6)). Finally, the Act shields the Auditor‑General from liability for honest acts or omissions in connection with the Inquiry (s 4(5)).
The long title states the statutory purpose as facilitating completion of the Auditor‑General’s inquiry. The Act implements that purpose by authorising the Inquiry, expanding the Auditor‑General’s remit for this matter, imposing time constraints on the production of a report, prescribing publication, limiting judicial interruption and financial support for litigation, and granting immunity and broad procedural discretion to the Auditor‑General (see ss 1, 3-6). The following sections test the trade‑offs, incentives and compliance consequences that these mechanical changes create, grounded in the Act’s text.
Main concepts
The Act defines and uses a small number of interconnected legal concepts to achieve its objective. Those concepts are: Inquiry, authorisation of powers, incorporation of Public Finance and Audit Act processes, report and publication, judicial restriction and limitation, and funding prohibition for legal costs.
Inquiry, as a defined term, means an inquiry by the Auditor‑General in response to a Treasurer’s request to examine and report on dealings relating to the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium Redevelopment Project. The definition expressly includes any matters referred to in a Legislative Council resolution passed 17 November 1999 (s 3). The definition therefore ties the statutory Inquiry to a specific administrative request and to a particular parliamentary resolution.
Authorisation and scope: s 4(1) authorises the Auditor‑General to undertake the Inquiry. Section 4(2) declares the Auditor‑General has the power to examine, investigate, inquire into and report on any matter considered relevant to the Inquiry. Subsection 4(3) then clarifies the reach and nature of those powers by stating four particular legal positions to be "taken" for the Inquiry: that it is an examination under s 32 of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987 (s 4(3)(a)); that the Auditor‑General may consider and report on matters even if they do not relate to a publicly funded body (s 4(3)(b)); that the Auditor‑General may exercise powers and functions under the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987 applicable to an examination under s 32, including making findings of fact and law (s 4(3)(c)); and that the Auditor‑General may make findings as to the conduct of any person (s 4(3)(d)). These clauses substantially define the Inquiry’s legal character and the legal effects of its outputs.
Discretion and procedure: s 4(4)(a) gives the Auditor‑General broad procedural discretion , the Auditor‑General "may conduct the Inquiry in such manner as the Auditor‑General thinks fit". Subsection 4(4)(b) gives explicit power to set time limits and other requirements and to make determinations or take steps on non‑compliance. The Act does not itself prescribe procedural safeguards, hearings formats or notice processes; it leaves procedural design to the Auditor‑General, subject only to powers incorporated from the Public Finance and Audit Act by s 4(3)(c).
Report and publication: s 5 mandates a hard deadline for a report (31 October 2001), requires delivery to the Treasurer and the Presiding Officers (s 5(1)-(2)), obliges the Presiding Officers to cause publication (s 5(3)), and deems the published report, for other Acts and laws, to be a parliamentary report published under the Houses’ authority (s 5(4)). Section 5(5) requires the Auditor‑General to prepare and deliver the report even if draft, incomplete, or if aspects are not concluded. The combination fixes both timing and parliamentary status of the report.
Who it affects
The Act’s scope is targeted but not limited to particular institutional actors. It creates effects for at least five categories of actors: the Treasurer, the Auditor‑General and his or her Office, the Presiding Officers of Parliament, persons or entities examined in the Inquiry (including private parties), and courts and litigants.
The Treasurer is the initiating actor for the Inquiry by the Act’s own definition. The Inquiry is an "inquiry by the Auditor‑General in response to a request by the Treasurer" (s 3). That places the Treasurer in the procedural trigger role , the Treasurer’s request is the factual predicate for the Inquiry as defined.
The Auditor‑General and the Auditor‑General’s Office are given functional control and exceptional protections. Section 4(1) authorises the Auditor‑General to undertake the Inquiry, s 4(4) gives procedural discretion, and s 4(5) provides that the Auditor‑General will incur no liability for an honest act or omission in connection with the Inquiry. The Auditor‑General also holds the practical power to set time limits and requirements and to determine steps for non‑compliance (s 4(4)(b)). The Auditor‑General is the person who must prepare and deliver the report by 31 October 2001 (s 5(1)-(2)).
The President of the Legislative Council and the Speaker of the House of Assembly are obliged recipients and publishers of the report. Section 5(2) requires copies be delivered to those Presiding Officers, and s 5(3) requires them, on receipt, to cause the report to be published. Section 5(4) gives the published report the legal character of a parliamentary report for other Acts and laws. That assigns an institutional duty to the Presiding Officers and fixes the report’s parliamentary legal status.
Persons and entities that are the subject of examination or on which the Auditor‑General may make findings are affected in particular ways. Section 4(3)(b) makes explicit that the Auditor‑General may examine matters that do not relate to a publicly funded body. Section 4(3)(d) allows the Auditor‑General to make findings as to the conduct of any person. Those two clauses mean private parties, contractors, directors, consultants, or other non‑public bodies involved in the Hindmarsh project may be examined and publicly named in findings. The Act also allows the Auditor‑General to make findings of fact and law (s 4(3)(c)), which creates reputational and practical consequences for subject parties. The Act does not itself specify mechanisms for funding legal representation for such persons: s 6(6) prohibits the application of public funds after 27 July 2001 for legal costs in proceedings challenging Auditor‑General acts, except where the Auditor‑General or the court applies funds.
Key duties and rights
The Act imposes several express duties and creates rights or protections that are central to its operation. These duties and rights are primarily borne by the Auditor‑General, the Presiding Officers, the Treasurer and courts, with consequential impacts on persons examined.
Duties of the Auditor‑General
Undertake the Inquiry authorised by the Act (s 4(1)). The Inquiry is defined as the Auditor‑General’s response to the Treasurer’s request (s 3). The Auditor‑General is required to prepare a report on the Inquiry by 31 October 2001 (s 5(1)) and to deliver copies to the Treasurer and to the President of the Legislative Council and the Speaker of the House of Assembly by that date (s 5(2)). Section 5(5) further requires the Auditor‑General to prepare and deliver the report even if draft, incomplete, or if aspects remain uncompleted.
The Auditor‑General has a duty to conduct the Inquiry in a manner the Auditor‑General regards fit (s 4(4)(a)). That is both a power and a duty to make procedural choices.
The Auditor‑General may set time limits and impose other requirements and, if those are not complied with, make determinations or take steps the Auditor‑General thinks fit (s 4(4)(b)). That creates a duty on persons when the Auditor‑General imposes such requirements to comply or face determinations.
Duties of Presiding Officers
On receipt of the report the President of the Legislative Council and the Speaker of the House of Assembly must cause the report to be published (s 5(3)). The Act further makes the published report, for the purposes of any other Act or law, a report of the Parliament published under the authority of both Houses (s 5(4)). This is an explicit printing/publishing duty tied to parliamentary processes.
Duties of the Treasurer
The Treasurer is the originator of the Inquiry request by the Act’s definition, so the Treasurer’s duty is implicit in triggering the Inquiry under the defined term (s 3). The Act imposes no further procedural obligations on the Treasurer, but the Treasurer is a recipient (s 5(2)).
Duties and restrictions on courts
Courts must take into account Parliament’s intention that the Auditor‑General prepare and deliver a report by 31 October 2001 and Parliament’s desire that the report be as comprehensive and complete as possible in determining proceedings brought in connection with the Inquiry (s 6(5)). This is a statutory direction that shapes judicial consideration of applications relating to the Inquiry.
Penalties and enforcement
The Act contains no traditional criminal penalties, monetary fines or enforcement regimes directed at third parties within its text. Its enforcement mechanisms and the consequences it creates are procedural and institutional rather than penal in the criminal law sense. Enforcement operates through statutory time limits, procedural powers of the Auditor‑General, publication mechanics, court directions, funding restrictions and an immunity for the Auditor‑General.
Time‑limit enforcement
The Act enforces rapid litigation timetables by statute. Section 6 imposes strict time limits for commencing proceedings relating to acts or omissions of the Auditor‑General: for acts before the prescribed date proceedings must be commenced within 14 days after the prescribed date (the date of assent) and may not be commenced if the limitation period has already expired as of the prescribed date (s 6(1)); for acts on or after the prescribed date proceedings must be commenced within 14 days after the act or omission (s 6(2)). These statutory limitation windows operate as enforcement by temporal bar rather than by sanction. They make available judicial remedies conditional on meeting short deadlines.
Auditor‑General’s procedural powers as enforcement tools
The Auditor‑General has power to set time limits and impose other requirements on the conduct of the Inquiry and to make determinations or take steps in the event of non‑compliance (s 4(4)(b)). The Act does not specify the nature of those determinations or steps, but the power is an internal enforcement mechanism within the Inquiry process for securing cooperation, documents or attendance.
Publication and parliamentary status
The Act requires publication of the report by the Presiding Officers on receipt (s 5(3)). Publication is itself a form of enforcement of the Parliamentary accountability and transparency function the Act expresses. Section 5(4) grants the report the status of a parliamentary report for the purposes of other Acts and laws, which can have downstream legal and reputational consequences for persons named in findings. The requirement that the Presiding Officers cause publication is an enforceable ministerial/parliamentary duty rather than a penal sanction.
Funding restriction as deterrent
Section 6(6) bars public funds after 27 July 2001 being applied to legal costs in proceedings relating to acts or omissions of the Auditor‑General, except where applied by the Auditor‑General or the court. That provision functions to deter or limit the initiation or maintenance of legal proceedings by restricting access to public legal funding. The provision is not itself a penalty for non‑compliance; it changes the incentives and resources available to litigants.
How it interacts with other laws
The Act expressly imports and modifies legal relationships with at least two classes of legal instruments: the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987 (hereafter PF&A Act) and the broader body of law that treats parliamentary reports, judicial review and remedies. The text specifies how the Inquiry is to be treated under the PF&A Act and how the report is to be treated under other Acts and laws; it also modifies the ordinary operation of judicial review and public funding for litigation in relation to the Inquiry.
Incorporation and application of the PF&A Act
Section 4(3)(a) takes the position that the Inquiry "is an examination under section 32 of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987". That is an express statutory deeming that links the Inquiry to the PF&A Act’s examination framework. Section 4(3)(c) goes further: the Auditor‑General may exercise or perform any power or function under the PF&A Act that the Auditor‑General may have in relation to an examination under section 32, "including the power to make findings of fact and law". By these clauses the Act imports the PF&A Act’s examination powers to the Inquiry, and makes those powers applicable beyond the usual boundaries defined by the PF&A Act to the extent the Act so specifies.
Expansion beyond publicly funded bodies
Section 4(3)(b) explicitly states that the Auditor‑General may consider and report on any matter even if that matter does not relate to a publicly funded body within the meaning of the PF&A Act. This changes the ordinary reach of PF&A Act-style examinations, which are customarily centred on public or publicly funded bodies. For the purposes of the Hindmarsh Inquiry, the Auditor‑General may direct the PF&A Act powers at non‑public entities and persons, an interaction that enlarges the scope of PF&A powers in this particular inquiry.
Parliamentary report status and other statutes
Section 5(4) provides that the published report, when published under s 5(3), will be taken "for the purposes of any other Act or law to be a report of the Parliament published under the authority of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly". That clause creates a cross‑statutory effect: other statutes that treat parliamentary reports differently from ordinary documents will treat the Auditor‑General’s published Inquiry report as a parliamentary report. This can affect admissibility, procedural consequences, or the operation of statutory notice or disclosure rules under other laws that distinguish parliamentary material.
Amendment history
The source provides a concise legislative history for the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium (Auditor‑General’s Report) Act 2001 and a note on later revision activity. The principal Act is recorded as Year 2001, No 38, with title Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium (Auditor‑General’s Report) Act 2001, assented on 3 August 2001. The commencement note in the material provided states "17.11.1999: s 2" and the detailed notes indicate that s 2 was omitted under the Legislation Revision and Publication Act 2002.
The published legislative history lines are as follows:
Principal Act: 2001, No 38, Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium (Auditor‑General's Report) Act 2001; Assent: 3.8.2001.
Commencement: an entry shows 17.11.1999: s 2, and a note indicates s 2 was omitted under the Legislation Revision and Publication Act 2002.
The Act’s contents list shows sections 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 and a "Legislative history" heading. Section 1 is the short title. Section 3 contains the definition of Inquiry. Sections 4 through 6 are substantive. The print indicates s 2 was a provision that has since been omitted in revision activity, although the source does not provide the original text or content of s 2 prior to omission.
No other amendments, schedules, or modification entries are recorded in the supplied legislative history extract. The notes suggest that to find further information and subordinate legislation one should consult the Index of South Australian Statutes or the legislation website; that is a directional note rather than an amendment record. The "Notes" section states: "For further information relating to the Act and subordinate legislation made under the Act see the Index of South Australian Statutes or www.legislation.sa.gov.au." That is an explicit pointer but not an amendment narrative.
The text also contains an editorial note that new entries appear in bold in the legislative history box; the only recorded variation specified in the supplied excerpt is that s 2 was omitted under the Legislation Revision and Publication Act 2002. No other textual amendments, repeals, or consolidations are recorded in the source provided.
Because the supplied legislative history is limited to those points, the practical upshot is:
The Act was enacted in 2001 and assented on 3 August 2001.
At some point s 2 was omitted pursuant to revision legislation in 2002.
The source does not report any subsequent amendments to the operative substantive sections (ss 3-6) within the provided extract.
Litigation history
The Act as supplied contains no case law citations, no references to judicial decisions, and no record of litigation arising under it in the text provided. The Act itself defines "proceedings" broadly (s 6(7)) and places restrictions and directions affecting litigation, but it does not list or summarise any judicial proceedings. Therefore, within the source material there is no litigation history to report.
It is worth recording the Act’s provisions that would shape any litigation history if proceedings were brought. Sections 6(1)-(2) impose short statutory windows for commencing proceedings in relation to the Auditor‑General’s acts and omissions: 14 days after the prescribed date for past acts (subject to whether the usual limitation period had already expired as at the prescribed date), and 14 days after the date of the act or omission for subsequent acts. Section 6(3) prevents proceedings being brought to prevent the Auditor‑General preparing or delivering the report, and section 6(4) bars proceedings to question the Auditor‑General’s bona fides or impartiality. Section 6(5) instructs courts, if proceedings are brought, to take Parliament’s stated intention and desire for a comprehensive report by 31 October 2001 into account. Section 6(6) limits public funding of legal costs after 27 July 2001 for proceedings relating to the Auditor‑General’s acts or omissions.
These provisions would have governed the timing, availability and funding of any judicial challenges related to the Inquiry if they had been litigated. But the Act text as supplied does not list any decisions, nor does it include judicial commentary on the Act. It therefore provides no primary litigation history to cite. Researchers or practitioners seeking to know whether judicial review was attempted or decided in relation to the Hindmarsh Inquiry must consult external case law databases or the South Australian law reports; such searches lie beyond the text provided.
In short, the Act itself regulates and limits litigation related to the Inquiry but the supplied source contains no record of actual litigation outcomes or reported cases arising from those provisions.
Gotchas
The Act contains several features that are easy to miss but carry concrete legal and practical consequences. The following points are grounded in the Act’s text and should be noted by lawyers, compliance officers and affected parties.
Very short limitation windows for proceedings
Sections 6(1)-(2) create 14‑day timeframes to commence proceedings relating to acts or omissions of the Auditor‑General: for pre‑assent acts, the clock is 14 days after the prescribed date (assent date) and actions cannot be commenced if the ordinary limitation period had already expired as at the prescribed date (s 6(1)); for post‑assent acts, proceedings must be commenced within 14 days after the act or omission (s 6(2)). These are extraordinarily short windows compared with ordinary judicial review practice. Missing these windows effectively extinguishes the ordinary procedural remedy for most applicants.
Prescribed date equals assent date , watch retrospection
"Prescribed date" is defined in s 6(7) to mean the date the Act is assented to by the Governor. Sections 6(1) and 6(6) reach back to acts and omissions before that date and forward from it. Practically, this means acts occurring before assent may fall within the Act’s limitation scheme. Users must be alert to the implications of the Act’s commencement and the prescribed date definition.
No right to prevent publication; publication is automatic duty of Presiding Officers
The President of the Legislative Council and the Speaker must cause publication of the report on receipt (s 5(3)). Section 6(3) prohibits proceedings to prevent the Auditor‑General preparing, continuing or delivering the report. If a person is concerned that the report will contain adverse findings, the Act narrows injunctive avenues to stop publication.
Short deadline for the Auditor‑General’s report and requirement to deliver even if incomplete
The Auditor‑General must prepare and deliver the report by 31 October 2001 (s 5(1)-(2)), and s 5(5) requires the Auditor‑General to prepare and deliver the report even if it is only in draft form or if the Auditor‑General considers the Inquiry incomplete or should continue beyond that date. This creates a potential for an officially published report that the Auditor‑General regards as incomplete; Parliament’s desire for a comprehensive report is nonetheless to be taken into account by courts (s 6(5)). Practitioners should therefore be prepared for publication even where factual or procedural matters remain unresolved.
How to comply
Compliance under this Act has three practical axes: responding to the Auditor‑General’s procedural requirements during the Inquiry; managing litigation risk given the Act’s limitation and funding rules; and preparing for public consequences of findings and publication. The steps below are grounded in the Act’s provisions and focus on concrete actions consistent with those provisions.
Determine whether you are subject to the Inquiry and preserve relevant materials
The Act allows the Auditor‑General to examine matters relating to the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium Redevelopment Project and expressly permits consideration of matters that do not relate to publicly funded bodies (s 3; s 4(3)(b)). Entities and individuals with any contractual, advisory, decision‑making, financial or operational role in the project should assume they may be called upon to provide documents or information. Preserve relevant documents, communications, contracts, board minutes and contemporaneous notes. Avoid disposition of relevant records pending clarification from the Auditor‑General’s Office.
Engage promptly with time limits and procedural instructions
The Auditor‑General may conduct the Inquiry in such manner as the Auditor‑General thinks fit and may set time limits and impose other requirements; the Auditor‑General may make determinations or take steps for non‑compliance (s 4(4)(a)-(b)). If the Auditor‑General’s Office issues requests for information, notices or attendance, treat them as time‑sensitive. Seek extensions only where necessary and in advance. Failure to comply can lead to determinations by the Auditor‑General and may increase risk of adverse findings.
Seek clarity early on procedural rules and rights to make submissions
The Act does not prescribe detailed procedural protections; it leaves the procedure to the Auditor‑General’s discretion (s 4(4)(a)) and imports powers under the PF&A Act (s 4(3)(c)). Request in writing from the Auditor‑General’s Office the Inquiry’s procedural protocol: how notice will be given, whether there is a right to see adverse material, whether there will be an opportunity to respond to provisional findings, and what protections exist for confidential or commercially sensitive material. Document all communications.
Prepare for the statutory reporting and publication timetable
The Auditor‑General must prepare a report and deliver it by 31 October 2001 (s 5(1)-(2)), and the Presiding Officers must cause the report to be published on receipt (s 5(3)-(4)). The Auditor‑General must deliver the report even if draft or incomplete (s 5(5)). If you are likely to be the subject of adverse findings, prepare public and media responses in parallel with legal responses. Consider assembling factual corrections, documentary evidence and concise submissions in advance to present to the Auditor‑General in the Inquiry process to try to influence findings before publication.
Current sections
Direct links to the current provisions in Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium (Auditor-General's Report) Act 2001.
South Australia
Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium (Auditor-General's Report) Act 2001
An Act to facilitate the completion of an inquiry relating to the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium by the Auditor-General; and for other purposes.
Contents
1 Short title
3 Interpretation
4 Authorisation and nature of Inquiry
5 Report of Inquiry
6 Judicial proceedings
Legislative history
The Parliament of South Australia enacts as follows:
1—Short title
This Act may be cited as the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium (Auditor-General's Report) Act 2001.
3—Interpretation
In this Act—
Inquiry means an inquiry by the Auditor-General in response to a request by the Treasurer that the Auditor-General examine and report on dealings relating to the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium Redevelopment Project and includes any inquiry by the Auditor-General relating to any matters referred to in the resolution of the Legislative Council relating to that project (in all its stages) passed on 17 November 19991.
Note—
1 See especially Hansard for 17 November 1999 at pp 481 and 482.
4—Authorisation and nature of Inquiry
(1) The Auditor-General is authorised to undertake the Inquiry.
(2) It is declared that the Auditor-General has the power to examine, investigate, inquire into and report on any matter considered by the Auditor-General to be relevant to the Inquiry.
(3) Without limiting the operation of subsection (2), it will be taken—
(a) that the Inquiry is an examination under section 32 of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987; and
(b) that the Auditor-General may consider and report on any matter even if that matter does not relate to a publicly funded body within the meaning of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987; and
(c) that the Auditor-General may exercise or perform any power or function under the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987 that the Auditor-General may have in relation to an examination under section 32 of that Act, including the power to make findings of fact and law; and
(d) that the Auditor-General may make findings as to the conduct of any person.
(4) The Auditor-General—
(a) may conduct the Inquiry in such manner as the Auditor-General thinks fit; and
(b) without limiting any other power, may set time limits and impose other requirements and, in the event of non-compliance with any such time limit or requirement, may make any determination or take any step as the Auditor-General thinks fit.
(5) The Auditor-General will incur no liability for an honest act or omission in the exercise or performance, or purported exercise or performance, of a power or function in connection with the Inquiry.
5—Report of Inquiry
(1) The Auditor-General must prepare a report on the Inquiry by 31 October 2001.
(2) The Auditor-General must deliver copies of the report to the Treasurer and to the President of the Legislative Council and the Speaker of the House of Assembly by 31 October 2001.
(3) The President of the Legislative Council and the Speaker of the House of Assembly must, on the receipt of the report, cause the report to be published.
(4) The report will, when published under subsection (3), be taken for the purposes of any other Act or law to be a report of the Parliament published under the authority of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly.
(5) The Auditor-General must prepare and deliver the report even if—
(a) the report is only in draft form; or
(b) the Auditor-General considers that the Inquiry is incomplete or should continue beyond 31 October 2001; or
(c) the report or any aspect of the Inquiry has not been completed or concluded.
6—Judicial proceedings
(1) No proceedings relating to any act or omission of the Auditor-General in connection, or purported connection, with the Inquiry before the prescribed date may be commenced more than 14 days after the prescribed date and in any event such proceedings may not be commenced if, as at the prescribed date, the time for bringing those proceedings has already expired.
(2) No proceedings relating to any act or omission of the Auditor-General in connection, or purported connection, with the Inquiry on or after the prescribed date may be commenced more than 14 days after the date of the act or omission.
(3) No proceedings may be brought, and no order may be given, to prevent the Auditor-General from preparing or from continuing to prepare, or from delivering, the report required by section 5, or any report prepared by the Auditor-General in purported compliance with that section.
(4) Without limiting the operation of subsection (3), no proceedings may be brought to question the bona fides or impartiality of the Auditor-General in the conduct of the Inquiry.
(5) If any proceedings are brought in connection with the Inquiry, the court before which the proceedings are brought must take into account—
(a) the intention of Parliament that the Auditor-General prepare and deliver a report on the Inquiry by 31 October 2001; and
(b) the desire of Parliament that the report on the Inquiry delivered by the Auditor-General be as comprehensive and complete as may be possible in the circumstances.
(6) No public funds may be applied in relation to any legal costs incurred after 27 July 2001 in connection with any proceedings relating to an act or omission of the Auditor-General in connection, or purported connection, with the Inquiry brought before a court, other than funds applied by the Auditor-General or by the court itself.
(7) In this section—
prescribed date means the date on which this Act is assented to by the Governor;
proceedings include proceedings for judicial review or for a declaration, injunction, writ, order or other form of judicial remedy.
Legislative history
Notes
• For further information relating to the Act and subordinate legislation made under the Act see the Index of South Australian Statutes or www.legislation.sa.gov.au.
Principal Act
Year
No
Title
Assent
Commencement
2001
38
Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium (Auditor‑General's Report) Act 2001
3.8.2001
17.11.1999: s 2
Provisions amended
New entries appear in bold.
Provision
How varied
Commencement
s 2
omitted under Legislation Revision and Publication Act 2002
Source text
Sourced from South Australian Legislation (legislation.sa.gov.au), CC BY 4.0.
South Australia
Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium (Auditor-General's Report) Act 2001
An Act to facilitate the completion of an inquiry relating to the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium by the Auditor-General; and for other purposes.
Contents
1 Short title
3 Interpretation
4 Authorisation and nature of Inquiry
5 Report of Inquiry
6 Judicial proceedings
Legislative history
The Parliament of South Australia enacts as follows:
1—Short title
This Act may be cited as the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium (Auditor-General's Report) Act 2001.
3—Interpretation
In this Act—
Inquiry means an inquiry by the Auditor-General in response to a request by the Treasurer that the Auditor-General examine and report on dealings relating to the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium Redevelopment Project and includes any inquiry by the Auditor-General relating to any matters referred to in the resolution of the Legislative Council relating to that project (in all its stages) passed on 17 November 19991.
Note—
1 See especially Hansard for 17 November 1999 at pp 481 and 482.
4—Authorisation and nature of Inquiry
(1) The Auditor-General is authorised to undertake the Inquiry.
(2) It is declared that the Auditor-General has the power to examine, investigate, inquire into and report on any matter considered by the Auditor-General to be relevant to the Inquiry.
(3) Without limiting the operation of subsection (2), it will be taken—
(a) that the Inquiry is an examination under section 32 of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987; and
(b) that the Auditor-General may consider and report on any matter even if that matter does not relate to a publicly funded body within the meaning of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987; and
(c) that the Auditor-General may exercise or perform any power or function under the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987 that the Auditor-General may have in relation to an examination under section 32 of that Act, including the power to make findings of fact and law; and
(d) that the Auditor-General may make findings as to the conduct of any person.
(4) The Auditor-General—
(a) may conduct the Inquiry in such manner as the Auditor-General thinks fit; and
(b) without limiting any other power, may set time limits and impose other requirements and, in the event of non-compliance with any such time limit or requirement, may make any determination or take any step as the Auditor-General thinks fit.
(5) The Auditor-General will incur no liability for an honest act or omission in the exercise or performance, or purported exercise or performance, of a power or function in connection with the Inquiry.
5—Report of Inquiry
(1) The Auditor-General must prepare a report on the Inquiry by 31 October 2001.
(2) The Auditor-General must deliver copies of the report to the Treasurer and to the President of the Legislative Council and the Speaker of the House of Assembly by 31 October 2001.
(3) The President of the Legislative Council and the Speaker of the House of Assembly must, on the receipt of the report, cause the report to be published.
(4) The report will, when published under subsection (3), be taken for the purposes of any other Act or law to be a report of the Parliament published under the authority of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly.
(5) The Auditor-General must prepare and deliver the report even if—
(a) the report is only in draft form; or
(b) the Auditor-General considers that the Inquiry is incomplete or should continue beyond 31 October 2001; or
(c) the report or any aspect of the Inquiry has not been completed or concluded.
6—Judicial proceedings
(1) No proceedings relating to any act or omission of the Auditor-General in connection, or purported connection, with the Inquiry before the prescribed date may be commenced more than 14 days after the prescribed date and in any event such proceedings may not be commenced if, as at the prescribed date, the time for bringing those proceedings has already expired.
(2) No proceedings relating to any act or omission of the Auditor-General in connection, or purported connection, with the Inquiry on or after the prescribed date may be commenced more than 14 days after the date of the act or omission.
(3) No proceedings may be brought, and no order may be given, to prevent the Auditor-General from preparing or from continuing to prepare, or from delivering, the report required by section 5, or any report prepared by the Auditor-General in purported compliance with that section.
(4) Without limiting the operation of subsection (3), no proceedings may be brought to question the bona fides or impartiality of the Auditor-General in the conduct of the Inquiry.
(5) If any proceedings are brought in connection with the Inquiry, the court before which the proceedings are brought must take into account—
(a) the intention of Parliament that the Auditor-General prepare and deliver a report on the Inquiry by 31 October 2001; and
(b) the desire of Parliament that the report on the Inquiry delivered by the Auditor-General be as comprehensive and complete as may be possible in the circumstances.
(6) No public funds may be applied in relation to any legal costs incurred after 27 July 2001 in connection with any proceedings relating to an act or omission of the Auditor-General in connection, or purported connection, with the Inquiry brought before a court, other than funds applied by the Auditor-General or by the court itself.
(7) In this section—
prescribed date means the date on which this Act is assented to by the Governor;
proceedings include proceedings for judicial review or for a declaration, injunction, writ, order or other form of judicial remedy.
Legislative history
Notes
• For further information relating to the Act and subordinate legislation made under the Act see the Index of South Australian Statutes or www.legislation.sa.gov.au.
Principal Act
Year
No
Title
Assent
Commencement
2001
38
Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium (Auditor‑General's Report) Act 2001
3.8.2001
17.11.1999: s 2
Provisions amended
New entries appear in bold.
Provision
How varied
Commencement
s 2
omitted under Legislation Revision and Publication Act 2002
Judicial limitation: Part 6 restricts litigation that would affect the Inquiry and curtails remedies. Key features are short statutory commencement windows for legal actions (s 6(1)-(2)), prohibition on proceedings to prevent preparation, continuation or delivery of the report (s 6(3)), a specific bar on proceedings questioning the Auditor‑General’s bona fides or impartiality (s 6(4)), and a judicial direction to take Parliament’s intention and desire for a comprehensive report into account (s 6(5)). The Act also defines "proceedings" broadly to include judicial review, declarations, injunctions, writs or other remedies (s 6(7)).
Funding constraint and immunity: s 6(6) bars public funds being used after 27 July 2001 for legal costs in proceedings about acts or omissions of the Auditor‑General, unless funds are applied by the Auditor‑General or the court. Section 4(5) grants the Auditor‑General immunity from liability for an honest act or omission in connection with the Inquiry.
These concepts interlock: the Inquiry definition triggers authorisation and expanded reach; the Auditor‑General’s procedural discretion and incorporation of s 32 powers create investigative reach and the ability to make findings; the reporting deadline and publication requirement lock in timing and parliamentary status; the litigation limitations and funding ban narrow judicial interruption and subject access to funds; immunity limits potential legal recourse against the Auditor‑General. The Act’s structure therefore privileges timely completion and publication of an Auditor‑General report into the Hindmarsh project, at the legal cost of narrowing certain judicial routes and enlarging investigatory scope beyond public bodies.
Courts and litigants are affected by the Act’s procedural bars and timetables. Section 6 defines "proceedings" broadly to include judicial review and other remedies (s 6(7)), imposes 14‑day limits for commencing proceedings relating to prior acts or omissions as at assent (s 6(1)), 14‑day limits for commencing proceedings after the prescribed date in respect of subsequent acts (s 6(2)), bars proceedings that would prevent the Auditor‑General preparing or delivering the report (s 6(3)), and bars proceedings questioning bona fides or impartiality (s 6(4)). Courts are required, if proceedings are brought, to take Parliament’s intention that the report be prepared and delivered by 31 October 2001, and the desire that the report be comprehensive, into account (s 6(5)).
Finally, public finances and litigant funding are affected. Section 6(6) prevents public funds from being applied after 27 July 2001 to legal costs in proceedings relating to the Inquiry except where applied by the Auditor‑General or the court. That shifts financial burdens away from public funding for third parties seeking remedies related to the Inquiry, unless the Auditor‑General or the court applies funds.
In short, while the Act is framed to advance an Auditor‑General inquiry, it reaches private parties associated with the Hindmarsh project, restricts avenues for judicial challenge and access to public legal funding, and places duties on the Treasurer, the Auditor‑General and the Presiding Officers.
Rights and protections
The Auditor‑General is protected from liability for an honest act or omission in connection with the Inquiry (s 4(5)). That is an express immunity provision constraining legal risk for the Auditor‑General.
Persons will have, at minimum, the formal right to bring proceedings described in s 6(7) (including judicial review), subject to the temporal and substantive bars the Act imposes. The Act defines and restricts the window for bringing such proceedings: for acts or omissions before the prescribed date (the day of assent) proceedings must be commenced no more than 14 days after the prescribed date, and may not be commenced if the limitation period had already expired as at the prescribed date (s 6(1)); for acts or omissions on or after the prescribed date proceedings must be commenced no more than 14 days after the date of the act or omission (s 6(2)). However, the Act expressly prohibits proceedings that would prevent the Auditor‑General from preparing or delivering the report, and bars proceedings to question the Auditor‑General’s bona fides or impartiality (s 6(3)-(4)).
Restrictions on public funding
The Act prohibits application of public funds after 27 July 2001 to legal costs incurred in proceedings relating to acts or omissions of the Auditor‑General in connection with the Inquiry, unless funds are applied by the Auditor‑General or the court itself (s 6(6)). That is a financial restriction rather than a legal right, but it materially affects standing and access to resources for potential litigants.
Procedural discretion and lack of prescribed process
The Act gives the Auditor‑General the right to determine the Inquiry’s procedural format (s 4(4)(a)) and to import powers under the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987 for examinations under s 32 (s 4(3)(a), (c)), including making findings of fact and law. The Act therefore both creates power to make findings affecting persons and leaves the detailed procedures to the Auditor‑General and the incorporated provisions.
In combination, the Act’s duties and rights tilt institutional obligations toward prompt completion and publication of the Auditor‑General’s report, vest broad procedural autonomy in the Auditor‑General, protect the Auditor‑General from liability for honest error, limit the scope and funding of judicial challenges to a short timeframe, and impose a publication duty on parliamentary Presiding Officers.
Immunity as a limit on remedies
Section 4(5) provides that the Auditor‑General will incur no liability for an honest act or omission in the exercise, performance, or purported exercise or performance, of a power or function in connection with the Inquiry. That immunity limits potential civil liability and therefore constrains enforcement against the Auditor‑General, shaping the remedies that may be sought by affected parties.
Judicial constraints and court obligation
Section 6(3) and (4) prevent courts from granting orders that would prevent the Auditor‑General preparing or delivering the report, or from entertaining proceedings that question the Auditor‑General’s bona fides or impartiality. Those are substantive restraints on judicial relief rather than criminal penalties. They also instruct courts to take Parliament’s intention and desire for a comprehensive and timely report into account when proceedings are brought (s 6(5)), thus shaping judicial discretion.
Absence of statutory sanctions against non‑public bodies
The Act authorises findings against persons and assigns publication rights but does not itself create statutory civil or criminal liability for the conduct of private individuals or entities discovered in the Inquiry, nor does it prescribe penalties for non‑cooperation beyond the Auditor‑General’s exercise of powers under the Public Finance and Audit Act as applied (s 4(3)(c), (4)(b)). Where enforcement beyond the Inquiry’s findings is required (for example, referral for prosecution or civil recovery), the Act does not specify those mechanisms; any such steps would be taken under other laws or referral processes, not under this Act.
In summary, the Act enforces through deadlines, procedural powers, publication status and funding restrictions while limiting direct legal remedies against the Auditor‑General. It uses institutional processes rather than punitive measures to secure compliance with its objective of producing and publishing an Auditor‑General’s report by the statutory deadline.
Judicial review and remedies
Section 6(7) defines "proceedings" to include proceedings for judicial review or for a declaration, injunction, writ, order or other judicial remedy. Sections 6(1)-(4) then operate to constrain the availability and timing of such proceedings in relation to the Auditor‑General’s acts or omissions in connection with the Inquiry. The Act therefore modifies the default contours of judicial review practice for matters tied to this Inquiry by imposing short limitation windows and prohibiting certain forms of injunctive relief that would prevent the preparation or delivery of the report. The Act also requires courts to take Parliament’s stated intention and desire for a comprehensive report into account when hearing such proceedings (s 6(5)), which is a statutory direction affecting judicial exercise of discretion.
Public funding and litigation funding rules
Section 6(6) interacts with public finance and litigation funding arrangements by preventing public funds from being applied for legal costs incurred after 27 July 2001 in proceedings related to the Auditor‑General’s acts or omissions concerning the Inquiry, except where funds are applied by the Auditor‑General or the court. This clause could interact with statutes or administrative policies that provide for government legal assistance, indemnities, or legal aid, by cutting off government funding in relation to this Inquiry unless channelled through the Auditor‑General or a court order.
Immunity and civil liability frameworks
Section 4(5) grants immunity to the Auditor‑General for honest acts or omissions in connection with the Inquiry. That interacts with general civil liability regimes by narrowing circumstances in which a civil claim against the Auditor‑General would succeed. It may displace ordinary tort or administrative law claims that would otherwise be available against investigators or public officers if plaintiffs could show negligence or other actionable conduct.
Absence of express interaction with other specific statutes
The Act does not, on its face, create new criminal offences, nor does it purport to modify other statutory regimes except to declare the Inquiry an examination under s 32 of the PF&A Act and to treat the published report as a parliamentary report for other Acts. It notably does not prescribe special discovery or compellability rules separate from those powers imported from the PF&A Act. Where interaction with other laws is necessary (for example, to pursue civil remedies arising from Inquiry findings), the Act leaves those interactions to be resolved within the ordinary application of other statutes and common law, subject to the Act’s limitations on timing and injunctive relief.
Overall, the Act is designed to be read alongside the PF&A Act and ordinary judicial review law, but it reconfigures that relationship: it imports certain PF&A powers, disapplies the PF&A Act’s limitation of scope to publicly funded bodies for this Inquiry, elevates the published report to parliamentary report status for other statutes, restricts access to injunctions and judicial review remedies through short time bars and express prohibitions, and curtails public funding for litigation. Those are the principal inter‑statutory interactions created by the Act’s text.
Users requiring a complete current statute text or a full amendment chronology beyond the supplied extract should consult the official South Australian legislation register or the Index of South Australian Statutes as the Act’s own legislative history note recommends.
Broad investigatory reach beyond public bodies
Section 4(3)(b) permits the Auditor‑General to consider and report on matters that do not relate to publicly funded bodies. This is not the ordinary PF&A Act footprint. Private contractors, consultants, directors and other non‑public participants in the Hindmarsh project can be subject to examination and formal findings (s 4(3)(d)). Entities used to the PF&A Act covering only public bodies should not assume the same limitation applies here.
Auditor‑General’s discretion and limited procedural templates
The Auditor‑General "may conduct the Inquiry in such manner as the Auditor‑General thinks fit" (s 4(4)(a)). The Act does not prescribe specific procedural protections (for example, notice, cross‑examination rights, or consultation steps). While the PF&A Act powers are imported (s 4(3)(c)), those powers may not impose the particular processes parties expect in other judicial or quasi‑judicial contexts. Practitioners should get early clarity from the Auditor‑General’s Office on procedural rules for participation.
Immunity for the Auditor‑General
Section 4(5) provides that the Auditor‑General will incur no liability for an honest act or omission in connection with the Inquiry. That immunity limits the effectiveness of civil claims aimed at remedying investigative error or misconduct where the Auditor‑General’s acts are shown to be honest, even if mistaken. It is not an absolute shield (it is limited to "honest" acts or omissions), but the existence of the immunity changes the balance of potential litigation outcomes.
Public funding for legal costs is curtailed
Section 6(6) prevents public funds being applied after 27 July 2001 to legal costs in proceedings relating to acts or omissions of the Auditor‑General in connection with the Inquiry, except where funds are applied by the Auditor‑General or by the court. For affected private parties or public servants this means access to government‑funded legal defence may be unavailable after that date. The practical effect is financial pressure to either seek rapid legal relief or to accept inquiry processes without full representation if competing funding is not available.
Prohibited challenges to bona fides or impartiality
Section 6(4) states that no proceedings may be brought to question the bona fides or impartiality of the Auditor‑General in the conduct of the Inquiry. That is an unusual express statutory bar on challenges to institutional impartiality in the context of this Inquiry and constrains one common ground for seeking injunctive relief.
Broad definition of "proceedings"
Section 6(7) defines "proceedings" to include judicial review, declaration, injunction, writ, order or other remedies. That broad definition means the 14‑day windows and other bars in s 6 operate against a wide set of possible legal paths, not merely a narrow class of remedies.
Statutory desire for comprehensiveness coexists with hard deadlines
Section 6(5) requires courts, if proceedings are brought, to take into account Parliament’s "intention" that the Auditor‑General prepare and deliver a report by 31 October 2001 and Parliament’s "desire" that the report be as comprehensive and complete as may be possible. There is a tension implicit in the Act between the political aim for both timeliness and comprehensiveness; courts are told to have regard to both when assessing legal challenges. Parties should be mindful that courts may prioritise facilitating completion and delivery over prolonged interlocutory relief.
Taken together, these “gotchas” mean that affected parties face compressed timelines, constrained funding for litigation, limited injunctive options to prevent publication, and a potentially wide investigatory net that reaches beyond public bodies. The Act’s text channels enforcement toward publication and report finalisation rather than prolonged court‑based delay.
Consider rapid pre‑emptive legal options given 14‑day litigation windows
Sections 6(1)-(2) impose 14‑day time limits for commencing proceedings in relation to acts or omissions of the Auditor‑General. If you are contemplating seeking injunctions, declarations or judicial review related to the Inquiry, obtain legal advice early and be prepared to act within those short windows. Determine the "prescribed date" (the assent date) for the purposes of s 6(1) and assess whether acts predating assent fall within the permitted window. Note also s 6(3) and (4), which bar proceedings to prevent preparation or delivery of the report and proceedings questioning bona fides or impartiality; these bars will affect the viability of certain remedies.
Plan for legal cost exposure
Section 6(6) prevents public funds being applied after 27 July 2001 to legal costs in proceedings about the Auditor‑General’s acts or omissions in connection with the Inquiry, except where funds are applied by the Auditor‑General or the court. Parties should clarify whether they would have otherwise expected access to government legal resources and identify alternative funding options for any litigation. If relying on indemnities or insurance, confirm whether such policies respond to Inquiry‑related proceedings and whether any insurer requires notification.
Maintain accurate contemporaneous records of interactions with the Auditor‑General
Given the Auditor‑General’s power to make findings as to conduct (s 4(3)(d)) and the Act’s limited recourse to challenge bona fides (s 6(4)), it is prudent to maintain precise records of meetings, requests and responses to the Auditor‑General’s Office. These records will support factual corrections and responses during the Inquiry and may be necessary if proceedings are contemplated in the narrow windows the Act allows.
Protect commercially sensitive information and consider confidentiality processes
If the Inquiry will involve commercially sensitive information, promptly seek from the Auditor‑General’s Office whether confidentiality protections, redaction practices or closed‑session arrangements are available. The Act does not set out confidentiality procedures; any special protections will be at the Auditor‑General’s discretion or under rules imported from the PF&A Act (s 4(3)(c)).
Coordinate corporate governance responses
Boards, officers and counsel for organisations implicated in the Inquiry should coordinate internal compliance, disclosure, and communications strategies. If the Auditor‑General may make findings about the conduct of individuals (s 4(3)(d)), boards need to consider independent review, remedial steps, or HR processes parallel to the Inquiry to manage reputational and regulatory fallout. Ensure that internal investigations and statements are documented and consistent with responses to the Auditor‑General.
Monitor publication and parliamentary processes
Once the report is delivered to the Presiding Officers, the report must be published (s 5(3)) and will be treated as a parliamentary report for the purposes of other Acts (s 5(4)). Prepare for the legal and practical consequences of that publication, including parliamentary scrutiny, media coverage and any statutory consequences tied to parliamentary reports under other legislation.
In sum, compliance under the Act is largely about timely and well‑documented cooperation with the Auditor‑General, early legal triage to preserve litigation options within very short windows, financial planning for potential lack of public funding for legal defence, and proactive management of reputational and corporate governance consequences in anticipation of a published parliamentary report. All suggested steps are tied to the Act’s provisions: procedural discretion and time limits (s 4(4)); report delivery and publication obligations (s 5(1)-(4), (5)); litigation limitation and funding rules (s 6(1)-(6)); and the Act’s broad investigatory reach (s 4(3)(b)-(d)).