Australia: When Will Enough Be Enough In FOI?

Last Updated: 17 September 2007
Article by Catherine Petre

In Re John Patrick Ford v Child Support Registrar [2007] AATA 1242 the Administrative Appeals Tribunal found that the Child Support Agency had gone to sufficient lengths to find documents requested by Mr Ford under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) ("FOI Act"). Any further steps taken to locate the documents, the Tribunal determined, would constitute an unreasonable diversion of the Agency’s resources. The Tribunal also found that Mr Ford’s application to the Tribunal was vexatious or frivolous under the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) ("AAT Act"), and directed that he must not make subsequent similar applications unless the Tribunal grants him leave to do so.

The facts

This case relates to one in a series of FOI requests and Tribunal applications lodged by Mr Ford, who had been employed by the Agency from 23 August 1999 until 7 July 2004. He lodged the subject FOI request with the Agency on 2 November 2005, asking for correspondence between, to or from two of its employees (whom we will refer to as E and H), which related to him and was dated between 30 August and 30 November 2005.

At the time of the hearing Mr Ford was in prison for offences including rape, threat to kill, stalking and aggravated burglary. It is not clear from the Tribunal’s decision whether E or H were victims of Mr Ford’s crimes, although it does indicate that he had subjected them to some kind of harassing behaviour and they were transferred from Melbourne to Perth as a result.

From 2004 to 2006 Mr Ford launched an extensive series of claims, including 22 FOI requests lodged with the Agency and 18 applications made to the Tribunal, apparently in search of information that would assist in his unfair dismissal proceedings and appeal against his criminal sentence. Twelve of the FOI requests related to correspondence somehow involving E and H. In relation to the subject application, the Agency searched for existing email and paper correspondence that fell within the scope of the request. E and H were asked for documentation on a number of occasions, but they denied holding any email correspondence relating to Mr Ford. Searches of the personal drives on E and H’s computers for correspondence from the period September to 11 October 2005 did not locate relevant documents.

The Agency did not search backup tapes on which deleted emails might have been stored, because of the cost and staffing that this would entail: it would have had to acquire new technology at a cost of around $500,000 and significant staff resources would have been required to examine the individual documents.

The Agency made its decision on Mr Ford's FOI request on 2 February 2006, refusing it on the basis that it would substantially and unreasonably divert the Agency's resources. Subsequently the Agency asked Mr Ford to narrow the scope of his request, but he refused. The Agency wrote to him on 21 March 2006, confirming its decision on the additional basis that the documents could not be found or did not exist.

Mr Ford applied to the Tribunal for review of the Agency's decision. The Agency applied to the Tribunal to dismiss the claim for being frivolous or vexatious and to make an order preventing Mr Ford from making other similar claims without leave. After the commencement of the Tribunal proceedings one relevant, printed email was discovered by the Agency's personnel unit. It discussed Mr Ford, and was sent by E to H and another person on 6 September 2005. In evidence E claimed to fear what Mr Ford might do if he became privy to the contents of the email.

The legislative framework

The Tribunal considered the following provisions in the FOI Act and the AAT Act.

Section 24(1)(a) of the FOI Act says:

"The agency or Minister dealing with a request may refuse to grant access to documents in accordance with the request, without having caused the processing of the request to have been undertaken, if the agency or Minister is satisfied that the work involved in processing the request:
  • in the case of an agency—would substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of the agency from its other operations".

Section 24A of the FOI Act provides that "an agency or Minister may refuse a request for access to a document if:

  • all reasonable steps have been taken to find the document; and
  • the agency or Minister is satisfied that the document:
    • is in the agency’s or Minister’s possession but cannot be found; or
    • does not exist."

Section 37(1)(c) of the FOI Act allows the exemption of a document if its disclosure "would, or could reasonably be expected to… endanger the life or physical safety of any person."

Section 41(1) allows documents to be exempt if their disclosure "would involve the unreasonable disclosure of personal information about any person (including a deceased person)."

Section 42B(1) of the AAT Act says:

" Where an application is made to the Tribunal for the review of a decision, the Tribunal may, at any stage of the proceeding, if it is satisfied that the application is frivolous or vexatious:
  • dismiss the application; and
  • if the Tribunal considers it appropriate, on the application of a party to the proceedings, direct that the person who made the application must not, without leave of the Tribunal, make a subsequent application to the Tribunal of a kind or kinds specified in the direction."

The Tribunal's decision

The Tribunal affirmed the Agency’s decision and also found that the email of 6 September 2005 was exempt. The Tribunal dismissed the proceedings for being frivolous or vexatious and directed that Mr Ford must not make similar applications to the Tribunal without leave.

The Tribunal accepted the Agency’s argument that the search of backup tapes would have unreasonably diverted its resources. In making this finding the Tribunal, took into account the cost of the actions required and the likelihood that relevant documents would not be found. Any such searches would have been, "a waste of time, effort and resources". The Tribunal referred to Radicic v Australian Postal Corporation (2000) 59 ALD 157, in which it was found that there was nothing to warrant an agency to expend its funds in obtaining additional equipment in order to satisfy an FOI request.

The Tribunal was satisfied that the Agency had taken reasonable steps to find the documents, through its inquiries of E and H and its electronic search, which covered half of the period in question. The combination of the inquiries and electronic search allowed it to draw a conclusion that no documents existed. The Tribunal noted that it would have been preferable for the electronic search to include the remainder of October as well as November 2005, but accepted that the respondent had already engaged in a number of searches in connection with Mr Ford’s applications and that it was reasonable to rely on E's and H's evidence.

The Tribunal found that part of the printed email dated 6 September 2005 was exempt because its disclosure could reasonably be expected to endanger E’s life or physical safety. Accepting that E’s belief that he was at risk of violence was reasonably held, the Tribunal took into account Mr Ford’s violent history and the absence of any statement by Mr Ford that E was not at risk of violence from him. Applying Centrelink v Dykstra [2002] FCA 1442, the Tribunal found that the email, if released, "would create a reasonable expectation, which was not irrational, absurd or ridiculous that objectively, [E] was at risk". The Tribunal found that the exemption for personal information in section 41 of the FOI Act applied to the remainder of the email such that none of the document should be released.

Again accepting the Agency’s arguments, the Tribunal found that Mr Ford’s application was vexatious or frivolous. In coming to this conclusion, the Tribunal noted the history of Mr Ford’s applications, in particular their number and similarity. It applied Attorney-General v Wentworth (1988) 14 NSWLR 481 and found the applications were calculated to annoy, as well as being manifestly groundless and ultimately hopeless: there was no evidence pointing to the existence of the documents he requested. The application was dismissed on this basis.

The Tribunal further directed Mr Ford not to make further similar applications without leave. It considered the "very unpleasant and disgraceful behaviour" to which H and E had been subjected by the applicant. It took into account the alleviating effect that preventing his repeated applications would have on them, as well as the fact that the it would assist the Agency to administer the child support scheme without being frequently hampered by Mr Ford’s applications


The facts of this case are unusual and may not often arise, however it is not uncommon for agencies dealing with FOI requests to have to decide how many searches are enough and what level of resource commitment is too much. The Ford decision provides some indication of how these questions might be answered:

  • Where an agency receives multiple applications for the same or similar documents from one applicant, it may not be expected to duplicate searches already undertaken.
  • Agencies are entitled to rely on oral confirmation from trusted employees that documents that are allegedly in their possession do not exist, especially where they are backed up by the results of physical record searches or database interrogations. The agency does not have to go so far as to search the personal possessions of the employees in question.
  • The introduction of new and expensive technology or infrastructure to deal with a request may constitute an unreasonable diversion of resources, as may the application of additional staff members to the task.

It should be remembered that the answers to these questions will depend on the size and resources of the particular agency, as well as the nature of the FOI request. Ford suggests that where searches have already been conducted and the likelihood of further documents being found is low, resource intensive searches may not be required.

Finally, Ford reminds us of the Tribunal’s power to dismiss a frivolous or vexatious application and to prevent further applications being made without leave. If an agency finds itself in a similar situation to that of the Child Support Agency in Ford, it may be appropriate for the agency to apply for orders under section 42B of the AAT Act.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.