Section 49A - Applications to Information Commissioner for review
Extract of legislation
Generally, Part VI outlines the powers of the Information Commissioner, the Public Access Deputy Commissioner and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) to review freedom of information (FOI) decisions made by agencies and Ministers.
For more information about reviews by VCAT, see section 50 – Applications for review by the Tribunal.
An applicant may apply to the Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner (OVIC)8 to review:
- an agency or Minister’s decision to refuse to grant access to a document;9
- an agency or Minister’s decision to defer access to a document under section 24;10
- an agency or Minister’s decision not to waive or reduce an application fee under section 17 (it does not matter whether the application fee has been paid);11 or
- an agency or Minister’s decision not to amend a document under section 39.12
OVIC cannot review an agency or Minister’s decision refusing to grant access to a document under section 29A (documents affecting national security, defence, or international relations).13 However, OVIC can review other, separate, documents in the same request which are not claimed to be exempt under section 29A.14
Where a document is excluded from the Act
Legislation may exclude certain documents from the operation of the FOI Act (for example, under section 6AA, section 14, or under a different Act). In these circumstances, the FOI Act does not apply to the requested document.
Where an agency or a Minister makes a decision that the Act does not apply to a document, OVIC can look at whether the documents fall within the relevant exclusionary provision. This includes by requesting submissions from the agency or Minister as to how the documents fall within the relevant exclusionary provision and compelling the production of documents where necessary.
Where the documents fall within the exclusionary provision, that is the end of OVIC’s role.
Where the documents do not fall within the exclusionary provision, OVIC conducts a review with respect to those documents.16
Decisions refusing to grant access under section 29A
OVIC cannot conduct a review, handle a complaint, or conduct an investigation regarding a:
- certificate signed by a Department Head or the Chief Commissioner of Police under section 29A(2); or
- question whether a document is, or whether a document including the information would be, of a kind referred to in section 29A(1), (1A) or (1B);
- decision to sign a certificate under section 29A(2).
However, an applicant may apply to VCAT under section 50(1)(e) to review a decision refusing access under section 29A.18
The kind of review that OVIC does is called a ‘merits review’. This means that OVIC reviews the merits of an agency or Minister’s decision and makes a fresh decision on the application as if it were making the decision for the first time.22
In this process, OVIC ‘steps into the shoes’ of the primary decision-maker, and:
- considers the facts, law, and policy aspects of the original decision; and
- determines what is the correct and preferable decision.23
‘Correct and preferable’ means that the reviewing body (OVIC) must make the correct decision according to law at the time of making a fresh decision. Where there are a range of possible correct decisions, the decision must also be the preferable one where it is ‘subject to the general constraints to which the administrative officer whose decision is under review was subject.’24
OVIC can also consider additional information, including a submission provided by an applicant, agency or Minister, provided during the review and that may not have been available to the original decision-maker.
When OVIC reviews a decision of an agency or Minister, it may:
- make the same decision as the agency or Minister;
- make a different decision to the agency or Minister;
- dismiss the application for review; or
- if the applicant agrees, refer the decision back to the agency or Minister to make a fresh decision.28
More information
For more information on how to apply for a review by OVIC, see:
- section 49B – Time for applying for review
- section 49C – Form of review
- Applying for a Freedom of Information Review
Read published OVIC review decisions here.
- Section 6I sets out the functions of the Information Commissioner and the Public Access Deputy Commissioner; both are responsible for handling FOI reviews. In this section, the FOI Guidelines collectively refer to the Information Commissioner, the Public Access Deputy Commissioner, and OVIC staff as ‘OVIC’ unless otherwise stated.
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(1)(a).
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(1)(b).
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(1)(c).
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(2).
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(4).
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(5).
- Section 6I sets out the functions of the Information Commissioner and the Public Access Deputy Commissioner; both are responsible for handling FOI reviews. In this section, the FOI Guidelines collectively refer to the Information Commissioner, the Public Access Deputy Commissioner, and OVIC staff as ‘OVIC’ unless otherwise stated.
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(1)(a).
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(1)(b).
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(1)(c).
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(2).
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(4).
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49A(5).
- Luck v Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commissioner (Review and Regulation) [2013] VCAT 1805; Risson v Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (Review and Regulation) [2014] VCAT 742; Marke v Victoria Police FOI Division (Review and Regulation) [2018] VCAT 1320.
- Luck v Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commissioner (Review and Regulation) [2013] VCAT 1805; Risson v Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (Review and Regulation) [2014] VCAT 742; Marke v Victoria Police FOI Division (Review and Regulation) [2018] VCAT 1320.
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 50(1)(e).
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 50(1)(e).
- Encyclopaedic Australian Legal Dictionary, ‘merits review.’
- Administrative Review Council, ‘Commonwealth of Australia Administrative Review Council What decisions should be subject to merit review?’, Australian Government Attorney-General’s Department (publication, 1999) [1.1] (‘Administrative Review Council’).
- Drake v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 24 ALR 577.
- Encyclopaedic Australian Legal Dictionary, ‘merits review.’
- Administrative Review Council, ‘Commonwealth of Australia Administrative Review Council What decisions should be subject to merit review?’, Australian Government Attorney-General’s Department (publication, 1999) [1.1] (‘Administrative Review Council’).
- Drake v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 24 ALR 577.
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49L.
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49P(2).
- See Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 50 for reviews by VCAT.
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49L.
- Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 49P(2).
- See Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), section 50 for reviews by VCAT.