A delegate examining a merger proposal that involves the excision of part of a local government area must consider the impacts on both the excised area and the remainder, not merely the areas being amalgamated. An administrative decision-maker required to 'examine' a proposal has a duty to form his or her own view about the matter and not adopt uncritically the view propounded in documents accompanying the referral. Where documents underpinning the financial case for a merger proposal are withheld on public interest immunity grounds, the balancing exercise under s 130 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) may favour production where the public interest in confidentiality is substantially qualified.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 28 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 28 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.