Queensland Judgments
Authorised Reports & Unreported Judgments
  • sclq logo
  1. Caselaw
  2. QCATA
  3. 2023
  4. Rinaldi v Department of Justice and Attorney-General (Right to Information and Privacy) - [2023] QCATA 136

Authorised Reports & Unreported Judgments
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
  • Unreported Judgment

Rinaldi v Department of Justice and Attorney-General (Right to Information and Privacy)[2023] QCATA 136

Rinaldi v Department of Justice and Attorney-General (Right to Information and Privacy)[2023] QCATA 136

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Rinaldi v Department of Justice and Attorney-General (Right to Information and Privacy) [2023] QCATA 136

PARTIES:

DION RINALDI

(applicant/appellant)

v

DepARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND ATTORNEY-GENERAL (RIGHT TO INFORMATION AND PRIVACY)

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

APL318-23

MATTER TYPE:

Appeals

DELIVERED ON:

8 November 2023

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Justice Mellifont, President

ORDERS:

  1. Application of the respondent filed 25 October 2023 dismissed.
  2. There be no order as to costs.

CATCHWORDS:

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – where a party seeks leave to be legally represented in an appeal under s 119 of the Right to Information Act 2009 (Qld) – whether there is a right to legal representation without leave of the Tribunal

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 43(2)(b)(iii)

Right to Information Act 2009 (Qld), s 119, s 122

McCrystal v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2023] QCATA 133, followed

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)

REASONS FOR DECISION

  1. [1]
    On 28 September 2023, Mr Rinaldi filed in the Tribunal an application seeking the review of a decision by the Office of the Information Commissioner (“the IC”). The appellant named the IC as respondent.
  2. [2]
    On 3 November 2023, I issued an order that the IC be removed as respondent and the Department of Justice and Attorney-General (Right to Information and Privacy) be added as the respondent.
  3. [3]
    The matter comes before me as, on 25 October 2023, the Department of Justice and Attorney-General (Right to Information and Privacy) filed in the Tribunal an interlocutory application seeking leave to be legally represented under section 43 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (“the QCAT Act”). Mr Rinaldi consents to that application.
  4. [4]
    Section 43(2)(b)(iii) of the QCAT Act provides that a party may be represented if an enabling Act states the person may be represented. Here, the relevant enabling Act is the Right to Information Act 2009 (Qld) (“the RTI Act”), which confers jurisdiction on QCAT to hear appeals on a question of law under section 119 of the RTI Act. 
  5. [5]
    Section 122(2) of the RTI Act provides that:

For the QCAT Act, section 43(2)(b)(iii), a person may be represented before QCAT by a lawyer on a reference of a question of law under section 118 or on an appeal on a question of law under section 119.

  1. [6]
    Accordingly, the parties have a right to legal representation in the proceeding.[1] As such, the application of the respondent filed 25 October 2023 is dismissed.
  2. [7]
    I make no orders as to costs.

Footnotes

[1] McCrystal v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2023] QCATA 133 at [7].

Close

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    Rinaldi v Department of Justice and Attorney-General (Right to Information and Privacy)

  • Shortened Case Name:

    Rinaldi v Department of Justice and Attorney-General (Right to Information and Privacy)

  • MNC:

    [2023] QCATA 136

  • Court:

    QCATA

  • Judge(s):

    Justice Mellifont, President

  • Date:

    08 Nov 2023

Appeal Status

Please note, appeal data is presently unavailable for this judgment. This judgment may have been the subject of an appeal.

Cases Cited

Case NameFull CitationFrequency
McCrystal v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2023] QCATA 133
2 citations
Jump To
Cite 1 - [2023] QCATA 133
Cite 2 - [2023] QCATA 133

Cases Citing

Case NameFull CitationFrequency
Deemal-Hall v Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions [2023] QCATA 1371 citation
Jay v Department of Housing and Public Works (No 1) [2024] QCATA 731 citation
1

Require Technical Assistance?

Message sent!

Thanks for reaching out! Someone from our team will get back to you soon.

Message not sent!

Something went wrong. Please try again.