Originally Posted by
Rojam
Lead Balloon and Para 377 - I agree the AD(JR) Act requires the decision in question to be made under a relevant enactment or regulations but a decision is broadly defined and includes various types of conduct and actions involving unfairness or errors of law with which a person is aggrieved. Clearly, Glen had some authorisation or approval from CASA in running his business or was seeking a continuation of same.This or these were stopped by the action of an authorised officer or delegate. Such approvals would stem directly or indirectly from legislation.
It is often useful to have the information contained in a statement of reasons if considering an application later to the Federal Court under any of the grounds contained in sections 5 and 6. Let CASA decide whether it can refuse to respond to a s 13 request.
Great! What I suggest you do is send a PM to Glen with the text of the request for reasons, to which you say he is entitled, that he can ‘top and tail’ and send to CASA.
(The last time I asked for AD(JR) s 13 reasons from CASA, I received a very long letter stating why, in CASA’s view, I was not entitled to reasons. I could have spent a couple of hundreds of thousands and years proving CASA wrong, but I had better things to do with a couple of hundreds of thousands and years. Perhaps you are better placed to pursue these matters for Glen in the event he ‘draws a blank’ Rojam?)