• HOME
    • About
    • Creating a Moral Panic
    • Expectations v Reality
    • All About NIPPN
    • Accessing Information
    • The Rule of Law
    • CRAP Act 2026
    • CRAP Policy
    • Site Administrator
    • Meet Our Mascot
    • Big Girls Don't Cry
  • MEDIA RELEASES
    • Media - 2026 to 2027
    • Media - 2024 to 2025
    • Media - 2021 to 2023
    • Media - TIME MACHINE
    • FOI Forensic Series
    • Media Policy
  • INJURIOUS CLAUSES
    • GIPA Act - Section 14 Table 3(f)
    • GIPA Act - Section 110
    • GIPA Act - Section 110 Costs
    • NCAT Act - Section 49
    • NCAT Act - Section 60
    • NCAT Act - Section 64
  • IMPOTENT ACTS
  • FORUM
    • Understand the Executive Narcissist
    • Stand-Out NSW Agencies
    • Rate Your Agency
    • Rate the IPC
    • Rate The NCAT
    • Rate NSW Dept of Justice
    • Rate NSW Office of Local Govt
    • Agency Responses & Open Letters
    • Ministerial Enquiries & Petitions
  • FOI Forensic Series - 11-march-2025
Port Stephens Council Solicitor Overheard Openly Bragging of Successful Pursuit of Monies Not Based in Law, 30.01.2026
Level 7 of the John Maddison Building Goulburn Street Sydney saw numerous matters today concerning the Local Court and the NSW Civil & Administrative Tribunal (NCAT).
As such the public area was filled with individuals from various walks of life; from defendants to prosecutors, and Appellants and Respondents. Uniformed NSW Police Officers were also wandering the location.
In the morning Courtroom 7C saw the matter of Port Stephens Council v Telina Webb of NSW Freedom of Information with Council appealing Webb’s earlier win in August 2025. This was a case of breaching privacy legislation, where Council had used Webb’s personal information unlawfully. Council did not rightfully seek Webb’s consent to use her personal information, Webb was successful in her Request for Review of Agency Conduct, and Council was not happy about it. Oh well.
This Site is littered with report after report of Port Stephens Council’s unacceptable conduct in the way it responds to the public’s legislated rights; repeatedly and continuously trampling on its mandatory obligations, and spending copious amounts of public monies to avoid due accountability.
Today was just another example, another rock on the mountainous pile.
Council’s in-house solicitor Lisa Helene Marshall sat in the gallery behind the contracted solicitors Nathan Sloan of Lindsay Taylor Lawyers and Matthew Harker barrister of Greenway Chambers.
Webb was not represented as is her usual form.
Sloan had failed in dramatic fashion in the earlier substantive case despite having the full support of both the NSW Information and Privacy Commissioners, how fair and equitable to stack such a team against a defenceless self-represented Applicant. But acting unfairly is the least of Council’s documented attitudes towards the public.
One of the primary issues being appealed today was Order No: 3 which saw the Council ordered to pay the tokenary sum of $500.00 towards Webb’s legal costs.
This is despite the enabling legislation the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (PPIP) making no provision for costs, in the context of legal costs.
On this issue Webb and Council agreed, the NCAT did not have jurisdiction to award such costs in PPIP proceedings.
It was an interesting turn of events given the very same Council had successfully pursued Webb, and her husband, for costs in PPIP proceedings earlier. It seems the law is one-sided and it all depends on which side you're standing as to what justice you receive.
Yes NCAT has awarded costs, and continues to award costs, in the context of PPIP proceedings without the jurisdiction to do so. Oh well.
However, when Webb pointed out to Council that such costs were not based in law, Council ignored the facts and launched its pursuit.
Port Stephens Council resultantly threatened Bankruptcy Proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia if Webb and her husband did not succumb and pay the ransom amount.
And so today at the completion of the Appeal Panel hearing, when exiting the reception area, Lisa Marshall was overheard bragging to Sloan and Harker, laughing in fact, that Council successfully extorted the protested costs by threatening bankruptcy.
“I’ve seen a lot of atrocious behaviours by this Council, I’ve been dealing with them formally since 2012. Every aspect of Council has been corrupted by the primary offenders who work in unison Tony Leslie Wickham and Lisa Helene Marshall. Wickham has seniority over Marshall. I’ve seen it all including making false and misleading statements to the judiciary and regulatory bodies. They have no scruples whatsoever; they don't even blink. The documents emanating on Council letterhead are their own testimony. So today really was no surprise when this so-called officer of the court was overheard bragging of her latest stellar achievement, extorting monies from the public, what a champion! I was standing in the company of (2) two other people who also heard her,” stated Webb.
“Sloan and Harker were totally focused on Marshall, she had their full attention. I guess they had to show interest, Port Stephens Council owns these guys. Neither Sloan or Harker made any return comment, they just stood silent. What could they say to their benevolent client when it's all about the money? Harker has a long history with Council and my husband and I. He was involved in the making of false and misleading statements in an NCAT Appeal almost a decade ago before he became a barrister. Those statements were made by Lisa Marshall and Tony Wickham. Harker supported them. Those actions will follow him for the remainder of his career, and he can be certain I have no intention of letting him forget it,” stated Webb.
“As for Marshall, she’ll never change. And she has to stay with Port Stephens Council because she wouldn’t survive in the real world plus she needs to stay tapped into all those financial benefits courtesy of public money. She’s a total disgrace to the legal profession and she’s happy to be that way, wallowing in that filth. Wickham owns her. This case today, fighting a decision which doesn’t make any single person accountable for stealing and misusing my personal information, is of no consequence to these people. It’s sport. And I notice no person from Council sat at the bar table today. They can’t fight fair against a person who’s not a solicitor and isn’t represented. They don’t have the guts or the knowhow, that’s blatantly obvious. I relish that.”
A review of the video footage of the threesome cavorting in the entryway to Courtroom 7C after the hearing sees Lisa Marshall’s big smile as she gloats over Council’s achievement to extort monies not based in law from unrepresented members of the public under threat of bankruptcy proceedings, with Sloan and Harker leaning in intently.
She certainly deserves public recognition for such conduct, in a public place, in a courthouse where the public seeks evidence of the administration of justice.
The earlier reported threat of Bankruptcy Proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court for monies not based in law is here.
Contact: Tony Wickham, Tony.wickham@portstephens.nsw.gov.au Lisa Marshall, Lisa.marshall@portstephens.nsw.gov.au Nathan Sloan, nathan.sloan@lindsaytaylorlawyers.com.au Matthew Harker, matt.harker@greenway.com.au
Contact us using this form to comment on this article.
Thank you!
We have received your submission.
Error
Bad respond
DraftCom Pty Ltd t/as NSW Freedom of Information ABN: 87 076 511 941 PO Box 8030 Marks Point NSW 2280 P: 1300 679 364 or 1300 NSW FOI F: (02) 8246 3484 Hrs: Monday to Friday - 9.30am to 4.30pm
E: info@nswfreedomofinformation.net
Copyright (c) 2021. All rights reserved. Created in Sitebeat.
Acknowledgement of First Nations Australia We acknowledge the Awabakal people as the Traditional Custodians of this area. We recognise their continuing connection and protection of the land, the waterways, and ecosystems since time immemorial. We extend our respect to all First Nations people and we respect the Elders past and present.
Black-Eyed Susan - Symbol of Justice
DISCLAIMER: The Information on this Site does not constitute legal advice, and is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. The information on this Site is general in nature, comprises publically available information, as well as the personal experiences and opinions of members of the community. NSW Freedom of Information asks every member of the community to respect the content of this Site, some of which has been provided by trusting third parties, and asks that permission is sought first before using the information herein, sharing the information herein, or copying or republishing the information herein.

We use cookies to enable essential functionality on our website, and analyze website traffic. By clicking Accept you consent to our use of cookies. Read about how we use cookies.

Your Cookie Settings

We use cookies to enable essential functionality on our website, and analyze website traffic. Read about how we use cookies.

Cookie Categories
Essential

These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our websites. You cannot refuse these cookies without impacting how our websites function. You can block or delete them by changing your browser settings, as described under the heading "Managing cookies" in the Privacy and Cookies Policy.

Analytics

These cookies collect information that is used in aggregate form to help us understand how our websites are being used or how effective our marketing campaigns are.