Page:Hocking v Director-General of the National Archives of Australia.pdf/64

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

58.

institution merely because Sir John held a public office. Hence, even if the Commonwealth or a Commonwealth institution had a superior right to possession as owner of some or all of the correspondence, Sir John's control could not be attributed to any organ of government.

163 In the result, no part of the correspondence was the "property" of the Commonwealth or of a Commonwealth institution, and, accordingly, the appeal should be dismissed.