Powell v Queensland University of Technology

[2017] QCA 200

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Tribunals
3. › Jurisdiction and powers
4. › Appeal on question of law
5. › Whether broadly stated powers enlarge jurisdiction
6. › Whether tribunal may make orders beyond those available to decision-maker under review
7. › Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 146
8. › Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld), s 132
1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Discretionary remedies
4. › Acquiescence
5. › Whether relief should be refused where party acquiesced in making of order below
6. › Whether nullity of order made by court of record requires setting aside regardless of acquiescence
1. Administrative Law
2. › Freedom of information
3. › Information privacy
4. › Access applications
5. › Evidence of identity requirements
6. › Processing period
7. › Whether tribunal could reset statutory processing period
8. › Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld), ss 22, 43, 66
1. Administrative Law
2. › Tribunals
3. › Courts of record
4. › Significance of court of record status
5. › Whether record should contain orders made without jurisdiction
6. › Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 164

Quick Take

When QCAT exercises its appeal jurisdiction under s 132 of the Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld), its powers under s 146 of the QCAT Act are confined to correcting legal errors within the scope of what the Information Commissioner could have decided; the tribunal cannot remit matters to the original agency or reset statutory time periods. QCAT's status as a court of record means that void orders on its record should generally be set aside even where the applicant acquiesced in their making.