Publication
Managing the non-performing contractor and preserving contract termination rights
Jeffrey Goldberger assesses the risks in terminating a supply or services contract, and the alternative path the Commonwealth can take.
Australia | Publication | November 2019
The Data Sharing and Release Legislative Reforms Discussion Paper,1 announced by the Minister for Government Services, the Honourable Stuart Robert MP on Tuesday2, sets out the Department of Prime Minster and Cabinet’s vision for data sharing and release by Australian Government agencies. It incorporates the insights that the Department – through the Office of the National Data Commissioner – has obtained from submissions and stakeholder engagement activities in the wake of the Department’s earlier Issues Paper for Consultation.3
The Department’s vision, as set out in the Discussion Paper4, has sharpened as a result of those insights. So too has the Department’s language: while the Issues Paper did not clearly distinguish between the concepts of data “sharing” and “release”, the Discussion Paper defines the terms up front.5 While data “sharing” refers to “the provision of controlled access [of public sector data] to the right people for the right reasons with safeguards in place”, data “release” refers to open data made available to the world at large.
Like the Issues Paper,6 the Discussion Paper emphasises the link between data sharing and efficient government services, recognising that interactions with government should be “as seamless, easy and fast” as banking or shopping.7 It notes that many in the community “already expect” government to be able to offer the modern courtesies offered by the private sector. These include “tell us once”8, and pre-filling of forms.
Given both major political parties’ policy platforms in recent years have given explicit support to improved service delivery, data sharing is likely to move its way to the top of Commonwealth agencies’ agendas, despite government’s historically “default closed” approach to sharing.9 Indeed, there is likely to be ministerial encouragement to do so.
It’s a Brave New World for government. In the spirit of efficiency, we set out below some key takeaways from the Discussion Paper, along with our thoughts as to what they might mean for agencies.
– mandatory additional requirements (Data Codes) imposed by the Minister by legislative instrument for sharing or release of certain types of data (sensitive data);14 non-binding guidance issued by the National Data Commissioner (eg on how and when to seek consent to sharing)15
– Data Sharing Agreements (DSAs) between agencies and data users16
– accreditation of data users and data service providers (organisations which would play a similar role to existing accredited data integrators)17, and
– an enforcement strategy with a graduated range of sanctions.18
– who is sharing and receiving data under the agreement
– why data is being shared
– what data is being shared
– how data will be protected and risks managed, and
– when the data sharing will occur.
The Department anticipates the release of an exposure draft of data sharing and release legislation in early 2020.29
Australian Government, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Data Sharing and Release Legislative Reforms Discussion Paper (Discussion Paper, September 2019).
Office of the National Data Commissioner (Cth), ‘Better, Easier, Safer Services To Be Achieved Through Public Data Sharing Reform’ (Media Release, 3 September 2019).
Australian Government, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, New Australian Government Data Sharing and Release Legislation (Issues Paper for Consultation, July 2018).
Above n 1.
Ibid 56.
Above n 3.
Above n 1, foreward para 2.
Ibid 4.
Ibid s 5.3, 36.
Above n 1, 25 s 3.3.
Above n 1, 21.
Above n 3.
Tanvi Desai, Felix Ritchie, Richard Welpton, ‘Five Safes: Designing Data Access for Research’ (Working Paper 1601/2016, Economics Working Paper Series, 2016); Felix Ritchie, ‘The Five Safes: a Framework for Planning, Designing and Evaluating Data Access Solutions’ University of the West of England, Bristol and Administrative Data Service.
Above n 1, 32, 40.
Ibid s 4.6, 32.
Ibid s 5.3, 33.
Ibid s 6.3, 42.
Ibid s 7.5, 50.
Ibid 49.
Ibid 37.
Ibid s 5.6.
Ibid 36.
Ibid.
Ibid s 5.3, 36.
Ibid 37.
Ibid 51.
Ibid s 6.5, 45.
Australian Government, Office of the National Data Commissioner, Resources Legislation: Discussion Paper (Media Release, 2019)
Publication
Jeffrey Goldberger assesses the risks in terminating a supply or services contract, and the alternative path the Commonwealth can take.
Publication
On 24 October 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) confirmed that the European Commission’s (the EC) 2009 decision, which imposed a (then record) €1.06 billion fine on Intel, was flawed as far as it found that loyalty rebates granted by Intel had anti-competitive effects.
Publication
The Dutch tax classification system for non-Dutch entities will undergo significant changes as of 1 January 2025.
Publication
In King Crude Carriers SA & Ors v Ridgebury November LLC & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 719 the Court of Appeal held that the claimant sellers (the Sellers) were entitled to claim the deposits promised under sale contracts as a debt despite the defendant buyers’ (the Buyers) breach of contract, which had resulted in the non-fulfilment of a condition precedent to the payment of the deposits.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023