Penfold v Parliamentary Commissioner for Administrative Investigations [2026] WASC 417 — Administrative Law & Application For Judicial Review — Barrister AI
Penfold v Parliamentary Commissioner for Administrative Investigations
Decision made by the Ombudsman under the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1971 (WA) to refuse to investigate the applicant's complaint
Complaint concerned treatment of development applications by a local government
Quick Take
1Under s 30(2) of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1971 (WA), leave to bring civil proceedings against the Ombudsman requires the court to be satisfied there is 'substantial ground' for the contention of bad faith — meaning a real ground, as distinct from ephemeral or insubstantial grounds — and the applicant bears the onus of adducing material in support of that contention.
2Alleged mischaracterisation of a complaint by the Ombudsman's office, including repetition of that characterisation on internal review, does not without more establish substantial grounds for bad faith where the correspondence demonstrates the staff examined the complaint, made further enquiries, and provided considered responses; defects equally explicable by human failings consistent with an honest attempt to discharge duty will usually be insufficient.
3Section 30(3) of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1971 (WA) precludes not only writs of mandamus but also certiorari directed at the Ombudsman's investigative decisions, and bare declarations as to the validity of the decision-making process will be refused where they would serve no useful purpose.
