Page:Hocking v Director-General of the National Archives of Australia.pdf/74

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

68.

Governor-General. The designation of the correspondence as personal and confidential and the terms of the deposit may be relevant when the Director-General of the National Archives of Australia reconsiders Professor Hocking's request for access. Those considerations may – I do not say must – be relevant[1]. And, of course, depending on the precise contents of "any information or matter that [each record] contains or that can be obtained from it"[2], reconsideration of the request for access to each Commonwealth record may give rise to different answers.

Form of orders

191 For these reasons, I agree that orders should be made in the form proposed in the reasons for decision of Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler and Keane JJ[3].


  1. Archives Act, s 35.
  2. Archives Act, s 3(1) para (a) of the definition of "record".
  3. Reasons of Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler and Keane JJ at [124].