Page:Patrick v Attorney-General (Cth).pdf/12

 period. The Commissioner did not request or require that Mr Porter provide a copy of the Document before he ceased to hold the office.

36 Following the appointment of Senator Cash as Attorney-General, the Commissioner was advised by the AGO that the Document was not in the possession of the then Attorney-General. The Commissioner sought further information from the AGO to establish whether Senator Cash was in possession of the Document, including as to whether she was entitled to access it, and invited further submissions.

37 By letter dated 6 October 2021, the Chief Executive Officer of the AGO (on behalf of Senator Cash) provided details of inquiries that had been made about the Document, including as to whether the "former Attorney-General's Office" had transferred the Document to the "current Attorney-General's Office". The letter stated the Document "was not within the possession, 'constructive' or otherwise, of the Attorney-General or her office". The letter contained no information as to whether there had been any request or demand for production of the Document from Mr Porter.

38 The Commissioner then sought clarification about whether the Document had been transferred to the National Archives, being archives maintained under the Archives Act 1983 (Cth). The National Archives advised that Mr Porter had transferred no documents to it.

39 After an exchange of further submissions, the Commissioner wrote to the parties stating a preliminary view that s 24A of the FOI Act applied because the Attorney-General had taken all reasonable steps to locate the Document, but it could not be found. Mr Patrick's response included a request that the Commissioner issue notices under s 55R of the FOI Act for the production of the Document, directed to various persons, including Mr Porter, as well as assertions that the Commissioner's contemplated course involved a misconstruction of the FOI Act.

40 On 1 June 2022 there was a general election and a change of Government. Mr Dreyfus was appointed to the office of Attorney-General and became the new respondent to the review. The Commissioner was told that the AGO had been unable to locate any relevant documents or record of transfer of documents from the former Attorney-General, and nor had the document been transferred to the National Archives. Patrick v Attorney-General (Cth) [2024] FCA 268