Read a selection of the Ombudsman’s Freedom of Information external review determinations.

These determinations show the types of external reviews regularly conducted by the Ombudsman, and provide insight into the Ombudsman’s interpretation of the Freedom of Information Act 1991.

Department of the Premier and Cabinet (2015/00806) (PDF, 1.0 MB)

The Hon Robert Brokenshire MLC requested access to documents demonstrating the ‘full costs of the advertising budget’ and the stationery and graphic design costs for promoting two campaigns. The Deputy Ombudsman varied the agency’s determination. The applicant was also granted an extension of time to make his application for external review.

Urban Renewal Authority (2014/05108) (PDF, 65.1 KB)No summary available.
Department of the Premier and Cabinet (2014/08666; 2014/08667) (PDF, 62.7 KB)

The applicant applied for:

  • 'A list [of and] a copy of any document or thing relating to the establishment of the LPCC [Legal Practitioners Conduct Commissioner] and the reasons why it became an allegedly exempt agency'
  • 'A list of and a copy of any document or thing related to the creation of the LPCC, the changes to the Legal Practitioners Act 1981 (SA) and the reasons why the LPCC is now an exempt Agency'.

The Ombudsman was not persuaded that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the agency held any documents within the scope of the applications for access. Accordingly, he confirmed the agency’s determinations.

District Council of Tumby Bay (2014/08201; 2014/08276; 2014/08277; 2014/08278; 2014/08279) (PDF, 85.3 KB)

The applicant made five applications to the agency simultaneously covering a broad range of topics. The agency refused to deal with the applications as it was of the view that they formed part of a pattern of conduct that amounted to an abuse of the right of access or were made for a purpose other than to obtain access (section 18(2a)). The Ombudsman confirmed the determinations.

Department for Correctional Services (2014/07824) (PDF, 62.5 KB)

The applicant, a prisoner, sought access to documents used to determine his level of re-offending risk.  The Ombudsman confirmed the agency’s determination.