Page:Kline v Official Secretary to the Governor General.pdf/16

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

12.

adequately serve the object of "public scrutiny" of the Government's processes and activities identified in the FOI Act[1].

30 Further, the purposive construction of the exception in s 6A(1), proffered by the first respondent, was said to be supported by a number of factors: the heterogeneous nature of the Governor-General's substantive powers and functions; the function of the Official Secretary to assist and support the Governor-General in relation to all of those diverse powers and functions; and extrinsic materials containing statements regarding the legislative purpose underpinning ss 5 and 6.

31 Generally, it was submitted that the appellant was not seeking documents which related to the management or administration of the Office, such as the office resources. Rather, the appellant was seeking documents which would elucidate the failure of her two nominations, whilst eschewing any right to be given access to any documents which disclosed the precise reasons for that failure.

"Matters of an administrative nature"

32 The task of construing s 6A(1) of the FOI Act is governed by what has been said in this Court recently about the importance of the text of a statute, the meaning and effect of which are not to be displaced by statements in secondary materials[2]. A purposive construction of s 6A(1) accords with s 15AA of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth). Further, cognate expressions in a statute should be given the same meaning unless the context requires a different result[3].

33 A preliminary consideration of considerable contextual significance is that the Governor-General is not subject to the operation of the FOI Act. Stating the same point positively, and utilising the nomenclature of the FOI Act, the Governor-General is exempted from the operation of that Act. The Governor-General does not fall within the definition of an "agency" or


  1. FOI Act, s 3(2).
  2. Northern Territory v Collins (2008) 235 CLR 619 at 642 [99]; [2008] HCA 49; Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue (2009) 239 CLR 27 at 47 [47]; [2009] HCA 41; Saeed v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship (2010) 241 CLR 252 at 265 [33]; [2010] HCA 23.
  3. Registrar of Titles (WA) v Franzon (1975) 132 CLR 611 at 618 per Mason J; [1975] HCA 41.