Nevertheless, depending on content, context and the effect of disclosure, there is scope on other grounds to claim an overriding public interest against disclosure.
Deputy President Higgins in Hall v Department of Premier and Cabinet  NSWADT 46 decided some withheld parts of a 1999 cabinet minute prepared in the lead up to the 2000 Olympics should be released, affirmed the decision (with a confidentiality order attached to the reasons) to refuse access to other parts that had continuing commercial significance to the Swans and the Stadium Australia Management Limited (SAG), and referred other disputed parts of the document back to Premier's for reconsideration. (The document as released is yet to appear on the department's disclosure log.)
The document in dispute was Cabinet Committee Minute SC 99-3: entitled 'Stadium Australia - AFL Reconfiguration', dated 19 January 1999, and attachments. The main purpose of the minute was "to obtain approval to amend the agreement between the then Olympic Co-ordination Authority (OCA ) and Stadium Australia to allow the Olympic Stadium (now ANZ Stadium) to be reconfigured to allow a broader range of activities to be held, including the playing of AFL football" and for OCA to contribute $6m plus a loan of up to $3m for this purpose. The Premier's department had initially refused access to the document as a whole, then released parts on internal review, identifying 'business interests of agencies and other persons' as the relevant public interest consideration against disclosure- those conditional grounds prescribed in 4(c) (disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to diminish the competitive commercial value of the information) and 4(d) (disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to prejudice any person's legitimate business, commercial or financial interests) in the Table to section 14 of the GIPA Act .