CNP v Commissioner for Fair Trading

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	CNP v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2017] NSWCATAD 70
Hearing dates:	24 November 2016
Date of orders:	07 March 2017
Decision date:	07 March 2017
Jurisdiction:	Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before:	J McAteer, Senior Member
Decision:	1. The decision of the respondent is affirmed. 2. The Tribunal has decided not to take any action on the matter.
Catchwords:	PRIVACY – Personal Information – Absence of Evidence of Breach – Whether hearing information amounts to a collection – Whether information held – Data protection
Legislation Cited:	Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 State Records Act 1998
Cases Cited:	Vice Chancellor Macquarie University v FM [2005] NSWCA 192
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	CNP (Applicant) Commissioner for Fair Trading, Office of Finance, Services & Innovation (Respondent)
Representation:	Solicitors: In Person (Applicant) W Maynard (Respondent)
File Number(s):	1610280
Publication restriction:	Section 64 (1) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 prohibiting or restricting the disclosure of the name of the applicant.

Reasons for decision

1. On 20 April 2016 the applicant filed an application for administrative review with the Tribunal. That application concerned how the respondent had dealt the applicant and his personal information when transacting with the respondent Department concerning various client complaints. The applicant submits that the respondent breached his privacy by the manner in which it dealt with these complaints.

2. CNP is the applicant’s pseudonym, in that the Tribunal has de-identified the applicant’s name from any open reasons consistent with the practice of the Tribunal in privacy reviews. This is an application for a review of the conduct of the Respondent Public Sector Agency, which was subject to an Internal Review application under Part 5 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (the PPIP Act).

3. The primary issue involved complaints concerning the operation of the applicant’s Strata Scheme, for which the respondent Department has regulatory and oversight authority. The PPIP Act has provisions for a person who is aggrieved by the public sector agency's management of their personal or health information, to request that the matter be reviewed by the Agency. For the reasons set out below the Tribunal finds that there were no significant breaches of the PPIP Act other than a minor issue concede by the respondent.

Background

4. CNP contacted the respondent in June 2014 initially on three separate occasions concerning the owners corporation of the Strata Scheme where he resided. Fair Trading staff handling the complaints contacted the applicant on 24 June 2014. The applicant was advised that the matter would be referred to the specialist support unit (SSU) which would contact CNP separately. Two of the complaints were then closed as duplicates and were deleted on 26 June and 27 June 2014. The internal policies and procedures of Fair Trading categorised these two ‘deleted’ complaints as ‘deactivated’ within the complaints database referred to as the Customer Assistance System.

5. Documents before the Tribunal…