Disclosure of the conclusion or gist of legal advice does not automatically waive privilege over the whole advice; the question remains one of inconsistency in the circumstances of the particular case, applying Mann v Carnell. The Bennett line of authority stating a general rule of automatic waiver upon disclosure of conclusions should not be followed. In FOI proceedings, the public interest override under s 50(4) cannot be satisfied by reference to abstract policy considerations such as the desirability of transparency in executive decision-making, because the Act has already struck the balance between competing public interests at the level of general policy. The extent of public interest in a topic is not, by itself, relevant to whether disclosure is in the public interest within s 50(4).
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 27 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 27 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.