VIC Do AAT decisions affect the states?

[Danman132]

Can a ruling at the AAT affect the states. Do the states have to follow a ruling made by the AAT?

I want to quote a AAT case in a freedom of information request I am making with the Queensland commissioner. But I am not sure if I can do that or if it has any relevance to the freedom of information laws of Queensland?

 

[Paul Cott]

Hi Danman, I would say that an AAT case would be persuasive, even highly persuasive in the States, but not necessarily binding.

 

[Danman132]

Hi Danman, I would say that an AAT case would be persuasive, even highly persuasive in the States, but not necessarily binding.

I agree!
I was thinking that if a decision is made by a Commonwealth Tribunal such as the AAT, then like all other Commonwealth Legislation, this is pre-eminent law, so from that I would imagine that the states can't enact laws or undertake actions inconsistent with pre-eminent laws.

 

[Tim W]

I agree!
I was thinking that if a decision is made by a Commonwealth Tribunal such as the AAT, then like all other Commonwealth Legislation, this is pre-eminent law, so from that I would imagine that the states can't enact laws or undertake actions inconsistent with pre-eminent laws.

Maybe don't get yourself into an overthinking tangle.
AAT decisions do not accrue into a body of precedent in the way you might think.
That said, I agree with @Paul Cott in that an AAT decision, on comparable facts and merits,
and applying comparable reasoning, might (very, very "might") help QCAT see things the same way.

 

[Danman132]

Maybe don't get yourself into an overthinking tangle.
AAT decisions do not accrue into a body of precedent in the way you might think.
That said, I agree with @Paul Cott in that an AAT decision, on comparable facts and merits,
and applying comparable reasoning, might (very, very "might") help QCAT see things the same way.

Yes, I agree.
I've used it in this way and I believe it will help form judgement.
I've also referenced the Federal FOI guidelines to arge some points. At the end of the day the foi guidelines guidelines for Commonwealth legislation and if I am correct Commonwealth legislation is preeminent. I'm not sure the states can create laws that are inconsistent with Commonwealth law as per section 109 of the constitution.
Is that correct or does it have to be an area in which the Commonwealth can legislate as per section 51 of the constitution? I believe but the sheer extent of the Commonwealth freedom of Information Act give some weight. They have obviously cleared the field for the states to make their own. The Commonwealth freedom of Information Act wasn't intended to cover the field it seems.