DSN v NSW Department of Justice - [2019] NSWCATAD 174

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: DSN v NSW Department of Justice [2019] NSWCATAD 174
Hearing dates: 11 July 2019
Date of orders: 23 August 2019
Decision date: 23 August 2019
Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before: G Blake AM SC, Senior Member
Decision:
(1) The respondent perform the information protection principles in ss 12(c) and 18 of the PPIP Act thereof by placing a warning or alert on the CSNSW profiles of the applicant and the other inmate on the Offender Integrated Management System database to ensure that additional care is taken to direct mail and other correspondence correctly;
(2) The respondent formally apologise to the applicant for its contravention of the information protection principles in ss 12(c) and 18 of the PPIP Act.

Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW – privacy and personal information – review of conduct of agency admitted to be a contravention of the information protection principles concerning personal information
Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW)
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)
Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW)
Cases Cited: BQ v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2002] NSWADT 64
DED v Randwick City Council [2017] NSWCATAD 327
Fitzpatrick v Chief Executive Officer Ambulance Service of NSW [2003] NSWADT 132
GA v Commissioner of Police (NSW) [2005] NSWADTAP 38
GR v Director-General, Department of Housing [2004] NSWADTAP 16
NS v Commissioner, Department of Corrective Services [2004] NSWADT 263
ZR v NSW Department of Education and Training [2008] NSWADT 199
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: DSN (Applicant)
Department of Justice (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
DSN (Self Represented)(Applicant)
R Jeyasingam, Office of General Counsel (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2019/00042981
Publication restriction: With the exception of officers of the respondent, the publication or broadcast of the name of any person mentioned in these proceedings or referred to in the documentary material lodged in these proceedings. This order is made under section 64(1)(a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.Note: a reference to the name of a person includes a reference to any information, picture or other material that identifies the person or is likely to lead to the identification of the person.

REASONS FOR DECISION

Summary

The applicant, who is referred to as DSN, seeks an administrative review pursuant to the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW) (PPIP Act) of the conduct of Corrective Services NSW (CSNSW), which is a division of the respondent, the Department of Justice, that was the subject of his application for internal review made under s 53 of the PPIP Act on 10 July 2018 (the internal review application).
I have decided to make the following orders pursuant to s 55(2)(c) and (g) of the PPIP Act:

the respondent perform the information protection principles in ss 12(c) and 18 of the PPIP Act thereof by placing a warning or alert on the CSNSW profiles of the applicant and the other inmate with the same name as the applicant on the Offender…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading DSN v NSW Department of Justice

Details

AGLC: DSN v NSW Department of Justice [2019] NSWCATAD 174
Case: [2019] NSWCATAD 174
Decision Date: 23 August 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of DSN v NSW Department of Justice, the applicant, DSN, sought administrative review of the respondent’s conduct which it was admitted contravened the information protection principles concerning personal information. The dispute centred on the respondent’s failure to adhere to the privacy laws when handling DSN's personal information, resulting in an error that affected the applicant’s communication with other inmates.

The primary legal issues revolved around whether the respondent had indeed breached the information protection principles as outlined in sections 12(c) and 18 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act. Additionally, the court had to determine if the breach warranted the applicant’s requested remedies, specifically the placement of a warning or alert on the Offender Integrated Management System database and a formal apology from the respondent.

The court found that the respondent had contravened the information protection principles by mishandling DSN's personal information, leading to an error in the communication process. The court held that the breach warranted the applicant's requested remedies. The respondent was ordered to place a warning or alert on the Offender Integrated Management System database to ensure that additional care is taken to direct mail and other correspondence correctly. Furthermore, the respondent was mandated to formally apologise to the applicant for the contravention of the information protection principles.

The court's final orders included the requirement for the respondent to perform the information protection principles by placing a warning or alert on the CSNSW profiles of the applicant and the other inmate on the Offender Integrated Management System database. Additionally, the respondent was required to formally apologise to the applicant for the contravention of the information protection principles.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) The respondent perform the information protection principles in ss 12(c) and 18 of the PPIP Act thereof by placing a warning or alert on the CSNSW profiles of the applicant and the other inmate on the Offender Integrated Management System database to ensure that additional care is taken to direct mail and other correspondence correctly;

(2) The respondent formally apologise to the applicant for its contravention of the information protection principles in ss 12(c) and 18 of the PPIP Act.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	DSN v NSW Department of Justice [2019] NSWCATAD 174
Hearing dates:	11 July 2019
Date of orders:	23 August 2019
Decision date:	23 August 2019
Jurisdiction:	Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before:	G Blake AM SC, Senior Member
Decision:	(1) The respondent perform the information protection principles in ss 12(c) and 18 of the PPIP Act thereof by placing a warning or alert on the CSNSW profiles of the applicant and the other inmate on the Offender Integrated Management System database to ensure that additional care is taken to direct mail and other correspondence correctly; (2) The respondent formally apologise to the applicant for its contravention of the information protection principles in ss 12(c) and 18 of the PPIP Act.
Catchwords:	ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW – privacy and personal information – review of conduct of agency admitted to be a contravention of the information protection principles concerning personal information
Legislation Cited:	Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	BQ v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2002] NSWADT 64 DED v Randwick City Council [2017] NSWCATAD 327 Fitzpatrick v Chief Executive Officer Ambulance Service of NSW [2003] NSWADT 132 GA v Commissioner of Police (NSW) [2005] NSWADTAP 38 GR v Director-General, Department of Housing [2004] NSWADTAP 16 NS v Commissioner, Department of Corrective Services [2004] NSWADT 263 ZR v NSW Department of Education and Training [2008] NSWADT 199
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	DSN (Applicant) Department of Justice (Respondent)
Representation:	Solicitors: DSN (Self Represented)(Applicant) R Jeyasingam, Office of General Counsel (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2019/00042981
Publication restriction:	With the exception of officers of the respondent, the publication or broadcast of the name of any person mentioned in these proceedings or referred to in the documentary material lodged in these proceedings. This order is made under section 64(1)(a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.Note: a reference to the name of a person includes a reference to any information, picture or other material that identifies the person or is likely to lead to the identification of the person.