Australian Tribunals (5 November 2026)

Send us Fan Mail A quiet day in the Tribunals edition of Thursday 5 November 2026: twelve decisions from three state tribunals, none with a headnote, and three worked examples from synopses. Who has to justify the black ink when an agency redacts documents in an access review; when a refused non-publication application can be revisited and what "necessary" means for an order on health grounds; and how special circumstances costs work in a no-costs tribunal. Tribunals Desk: greyhound records and the black ink (lead; framework and outcome from the synopsis). Animal Liberation NSW v Greyhound Welfare & Integrity Commission [2026] NSWCATAD 338 - synopsis: GIPA merits review (s 63 Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW)); the s 5 presumption favouring disclosure, the s 13 balancing test and the closed list in s 14 of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW); the agency's burden under s 105(1); Table items tied to particular redactions; affidavits, cross-examination and concessions; confidential material under s 107 and s 64 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW). Only specified redactions released; the balance affirmed. JADE Tribunals Desk: a practitioner and non-publication (framework from the synopsis; no outcome stated). Medical Board of Australia and a Practitioner [2026] WASAT 121 - synopsis: non-publication orders under ss 61 and 62 State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA); revisiting a refused interlocutory application needs a material change of circumstances or new evidence (interests of justice); "necessary" under s 61(4)(d) means a real and substantial connection, not a remote possibility; residual third-party risk no bar; expert evidence in a tribunal not bound by the rules of evidence; framing workable orders. JADE Tribunals Desk: special circumstances and costs (framework from the synopsis). HYH v University of Wollongong (No 5) [2026] NSWCATAD 341 - synopsis: the two-stage s 60 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) test; post-decision conduct generally not a basis for costs; repeatedly seeking final-style relief as interim relief under s 105 Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) can be special circumstances; countervailing factors can narrow an order to a single hearing appearance; costs on the papers, no deferral pending appeal. JADE Registry (list only; by subject; no outcome): Legal Services and Complaints Committee and Barker [2026] WASAT 135 (strike out); Medical Board of Australia and a Practitioner [2025] WASAT 135 (interlocutory orders; citation as printed in the edition); Judge and Churches [2026] WASAT 133 (administrative review); Cimbrone Park Pty Ltd and Regional Director, Swan Avon Region as Delegate of the Minister for Water [2026] WASAT 134 (administrative review); YTW v YVL [2026] NSWCATAP 345 (appeal grounds); Hunter Homes Pty Ltd v Christopher Burg [2026] NSWCATAP 346 (appeal grounds); Tahlysa Pty Limited v Owners Corporation 1 Plan No. PS329337E [2026] VCAT 914 (costs); Wootton v Melbourne Fine Fencing Pty Ltd [2026] VCAT 919 (breach of contract); Li v Kingston CC [2026] VCAT 920 (tree removal permit). Case notes Animal Liberation NSW v Greyhou