Adjudication No. 260 (October 1985) [1985] APC 52

ADJUDICATION No. 260 (October 1985)

The State Rail Authority (SRA) complains that certain statements about a rail accident on January 29, 1985, which were published in the Pictorial News (a Sydney suburban newspaper) on June 19, 1985, were inaccurate. An earlier complaint about other statements by the paper alleging sabotage in the accident was upheld in Adjudication No. 237, as yet unpublished by the paper.

The statements now complained of are that the last carriage "came within centimetres of plunging off the bridge", and that "the SRA has not released details of an inquiry into that accident".

As to the first statement the SRA says that it is misleading because the wheel of the front bogie of the derailed carriage wedged between the main rail and a guard rail which is laid there for that very purpose. The Managing Editor of the paper on the other hand points out that photographs show that the back wheels of the carriage were near the edge of the bridge, and the carriage itself was leaning against a handrail of the bridge that had been bent out a considerable distance. In the circumstances we do not think that the paper was unreasonable in using a phrase which meant that the carriage had come close to going off the bridge.

In relation to the statement that it has not released details of the inquiry, the SRA points to two press releases. The first, of a little over a page, gave preliminary results of the inquiry on February 4, 1985. The second, issued on April 3, 1985, gave a one page summary of the conclusions of the inquiry as to the cause of the accident. It concluded with the statement that, in accordance with section 61 of the State Railways Act, the Chief Executive of the SRA was to forward a copy of the report to the Minister.

In view of the brevity of the press release, and the fact that it did not give any information as to the evidence and reasoning on which the bare findings were based, we think that the paper was entitled to take the view that "details" of the inquiry had not been released. The public and the press on its behalf have a right to expect more information than this.

The complaint is dismissed.