Home -> Law Blog Directory -> International Law Blogs -> Open and Shut
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
International Law
: Open and ShutUltimate exercise in futility
The decision-maker in the Department decided none of the exemptions in the FOI Act were applicable, and this decision was upheld on internal review. The third party elected not to appeal to the Tribunal at that point, preferring instead to complain to the Ombudsman. The appeal period in relation to the decision expired. The documents had now been released in their entirety. But the applicant decided to ask the Tribunal to rule on the question of whether the documents should have been released in any event. Senior Member McCabe accepted that the Tribunal had jurisdiction but dismissed the proceedings as frivolous under s 42B of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 on the basis there was no point persisting with the appeal because the documents had already been released. "As a practical matter, there is nothing left for the Tribunal to do....The decision to release the documents cannot be unmade in a practical sense." And then proceeded to explain why the third party's arguments against disclosure wouldn't have succeeded in any event.
The tax-payer was the one out of pocket here.
Full post as published by Open and Shut on April 08, 2010 (boomark / email).

The Baby Doe Rules and Texas's 'Futility Law'
Sue L. Robinson: Motion to Amend Not Futile When "Substantive Dispute" Present









