The Supreme Court decision mentioned in the release (or the ‘Enet case’) concerned the question of access to an agreement between the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and a private company, Enet. One of the issues was whether the Information Commissioner was correct in finding that, under section 22(12)(b) of the FOI Act, a public body’s refusal of a request was ‘presumed not to have been justified unless it satisfied the Commissioner that it was justified’. In its judgment, the Supreme Court found that the Commissioner’s interpretation was correct. However, it also found that the failure to meet the presumption was a starting point for a review, and the Commissioner himself must adjudicate the merits of the decision to refuse the request through an analysis of the records and the interests engaged which might suggest either disclosure of refusal. On the matter of the public interest balancing test, the Court found that the public interest used cannot be the general public interest in ‘disclosure and transparency in public undertakings’ and that there must be a sufficiently specific, cogent and fact-based reason to tip the balance in favour of disclosure.