Kant v Australian Information Commissioner (No 3)

• 1. Administrative Law
  2. › Judicial review
  3. › Jurisdictional error
  4. › Mischaracterisation of complaint
  5. › Whether delegate's characterisation of privacy complaint as solely about ASIO was reasonably open
  6. › Whether unreasonable characterisation constituted jurisdictional error
  7. › Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), ss 7, 36, 40
• 1. Administrative Law
  2. › Judicial review
  3. › Materiality of error
  4. › Reliance on wrong statutory provision
  5. › Whether reliance on wrong subsection was material where correct subsection produced same result
  6. › Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), s 7(1)(a)(i)(B), s 7(1A)(a)
• 1. Administrative Law
  2. › Privacy
  3. › Scope of Commissioner's investigative powers
  4. › Exempt agencies
  5. › Whether s 12B(2) of Privacy Act independently authorises investigation of ASIO by reference to ICCPR
  6. › Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), ss 7, 12B, 40
• 1. Practice and Procedure
  2. › Costs
  3. › Self-represented litigants
  4. › Whether costs recoverable as damages
  5. › Entitlement to disbursements only
  6. › Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), s 43

Quick Take