Australia: Waiver Of Fees: When Does Public Interest Favour Waiver?

Key Point

  • A recent case takes a fresh look at the circumstances in which waiver of fees will be in the public interest.

In Re Alex Encel and Secretary, Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy [2008] AATA 72, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal ("AAT") considered whether the fees for processing an application for access to documents under the Freedom of Information Act ("FOI Act") should be waived or reduced on the grounds of public interest. The AAT found that the availability of the documents and the debate that their disclosure would generate were in the public interest and that the processing charge should be waived.

The facts

Mr Encel, a retailer of televisions and sound systems as well as a commentator on matters such as the introduction of digital television in Australia, made a request under the FOI Act to the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy. Mr Encel requested information regarding government expenditure incurred in supporting digital television on the one hand as against analogue television on the other, including the projected costs of supporting both analogue and digital television until the closedown of analogue television.

The Department determined that a $30 application fee as well as a charge of $630.11 payable by Mr Encel for processing his request on the basis of the time taken to identify, search for, retrieve and photocopy the relevant documents. Mr Encel paid the application fee but requested that, pursuant to section 29(4) of the FOI Act, the Department reduce the charge on the basis that the disclosure of the documents he had requested was in the general public interest.

The basis of his argument on the general public interest was that the documents sought concerned the expenditure of a substantial amount of Government money that may prove unnecessary and they also revealed the potential realisable value of a public asset under Government management. Mr Encel also noted that following the publication of an article by him regarding digital and analogue television, he and the ABC program that had broadcast his opinions, had received comments from the public by phone, email and letters expressing interest in the subject.

The Department refused to reduce or waive the charge and subsequently, Mr Encel brought proceedings in the AAT to have the decision to impose the charge set aside.

Deputy President (DP) Forgie of the AAT decided that the charge should be waived. In her reasons for decision, she stated that:

"Given my earlier conclusion that the subject of digital television and its introduction into Australia is one that is very much a matter of public interest, I have concluded that, apart from the explanatory memorandum [which was in the public domain], the processing of the request and any provision of access to the documents as a result of that processing is in the interest of the general public or of a substantial section of the public."

The legislative framework

Under section 29(1) of the FOI Act, an Agency or Minister can decide that an applicant is liable to pay a charge in respect of a request for access to a document. However, under section 29(4), "where the applicant has notified the agency or Minister... that the applicant contends that the charge should be reduced or not imposed, the agency or Minister may decide that the charge is to be reduced or not imposed."

Section 29(5) of the FOI Act sets out the considerations that the Agency or Minister may take into account. It states:

"Without limiting the matters the agency or Minister may take into account in determining whether or not to reduce or not to impose the charge, the agency or Minister must take into account:
(a) whether the payment of the charge, or part of it, would cause financial hardship to the applicant, or to a person on whose behalf the application was made; and
(b) whether the giving of access to the document in question is in the general public interest or in the interest of a substantial section of the public."

The Tribunal's decision

In reaching her decision, DP Forgie had regard to the following matters.

First, section 29(5)(b) of the FOI Act is concerned with whether the "giving of access" is in the public interest and not with whether the granting of waiver of the charge is in the public interest.

Secondly, section 29(5) does not require the decision-maker or the AAT to decide whether access will be given before a decision is made to estimate the charges under the Regulations. In addition, it does not authorise the decision-maker or the Tribunal to consider whether access should be given.

In taking this view, DP Forgie distinguished the approach taken by DP Walker in Re Stephanie Peatling and Department of Employment and Workplace Relations [2007] AATA 1011 when considering the application of section 29(4) to that case. In that case, the AAT refused an application by Ms Peatling, a journalist employed by the Sydney Morning Herald, to waive or reduce the processing charge for access to documents relating to the Federal Government's "Welfare-to-Work" package (we looked at it here).

In Peatling, in considering the question regarding the public interest, DP Walker had addressed matters such as whether the information in the documents was potentially misleading or confusing, whether material parts of the information had been overtaken by events and were out of date and whether the information, if released could cause persons or organisations to distort their behaviour with potentially adverse impacts on personal, company or broader economic performance.

DP Forgie found that the matters identified by DP Walker in Peatling as relevant to the issue of public interest were very difficult to determine when the documents were not before the Tribunal as a decision on the request would not have been made and was not being reviewed. DP Forgie found that the matters identified in Peatling and referred to above were more appropriate to be addressed in the context of decisions as to whether access should be given to documents rather than whether a charge should be reduced or not imposed.

Thirdly, section 29(5)(b) requires a decision-maker or the Tribunal to take into account whether the giving of access to the document is in the general public interest or in the interest of a substantial section of the public. That requirement does not equate with a requirement that the documents will come to the attention of the public. It is the "giving of access" and the consequences of that giving of access that is relevant under that provision. The consequence that is sought from the giving of access is that it is in the public interest.

Fourthly, pursuant to section 29(5) of the FOI Act, it is not necessary that both elements of section 29(5) of the FOI Act, namely financial hardship and public interest, be satisfied in order for a charge to be reduced or waived. Satisfaction of one of the elements may be sufficient for a decision-maker to reduce or waive a charge.

In coming to this view, DP Forgie disagreed with the reasoning of Senior Member Kelly in Re Australian Privacy Foundation and Attorney-General's Department. In that matter, Senior Member Kelly had decided that the processing fee should be charged on the basis that even if it was assumed that access to the documents by the applicant would be in the general public interest or in the interest of a substantial section of the public, she was satisfied that the imposition of the charge on the applicant would not cause it financial hardship and that the processing fee should be charged.

DP Forgie, in her decision, emphasised that a consideration of whether to reduce or not to impose charges is not the occasion for a consideration of whether the documents sought by the applicant should be released or whether they can properly be the subject of a claim for exemption under Pt IV of the FOI Act. However, similar to the decision in Peatling, DP Forgie did undertake the balancing of various factors when considering the exercise of her discretion as provided by section 29(4). DP Forgie referred to the prima facie position established by section 29 of the FOI Act that applicants should contribute to the cost of processing their FOI requests and found that neither the public interest nor any other consideration that is relevant in the FOI Act required that Mr Encel be given, without any charge, documents that were readily available in the public domain.


The decision in Encel raises questions as to the extent to which a decision-maker or the Tribunal should look to the nature and content of the documents to which access is being sought, when considering whether to reduce or not to impose charges for the processing of an FOI application. DP Forgie found that the release of the documents being sought in this case would be in the public interest as release would provide the public interest with "sufficient and appropriate information to facilitate the public's ability to discuss, review and criticise government action" and that as such, the processing charge should not be imposed.

However, it is likely, as it was in Peatling, that questions will arise whether the documents being sought under the FOI Act contain sufficient and appropriate information about government action, disclosure of which would be in the general public interest or in the interest of a substantial section of the public. Such questions may very well require a decision-maker or the Tribunal to consider matters such as whether the relevant documents are potentially misleading or confusing and have been overtaken by events and are out-of-date.

In the end, the difference in the decision in Encel and Peatling could be considered to come down to the fact that in Peatling, it was found that there were countervailing considerations favouring the imposition of the processing charge which outweighed the public interest in the giving of access to the documents in that case. In particular, the fact that the FOI applicant was employed by a large news organisation that sought access to the documents in the ordinary course of its business and the lack of evidence that it would not proceed with the request if the charge was not waived or reduced ultimately proved decisive.

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)
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.