JS v Snowy River Shire Council - [2010] NSWADT 247

CITATION: JS v Snowy River Shire Council [2010] NSWADT 247

DIVISION: General Division

PARTIES:
APPLICANT
JS
RESPONDENT
Snowy River Shire Council

FILE NUMBER: 093225

HEARING DATES: On the papers

SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 19 July 2010

DATE OF DECISION:
20 October 2010

BEFORE: Montgomery S - Judicial Member

CATCHWORDS: Privacy - information protection principle - disclosure to third party

LEGISLATION CITED: Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997
Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998

CASES CITED: JD v NSW Medical Board (No.2) [2006] NSWADT 345
NW v New South Wales Fire Brigades (No 2) [2006] NSWADT 61
RD v Department of Education and Training [2005] NSWADT 195

REPRESENTATION:
APPLICANT
In person
RESPONDENT
A Bradbury, solicitor

ORDERS: In accordance with section 55(2) of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 the Tribunal determines to take no further action on the matter.

REASONS FOR DECISION

1 In these reasons the names of all private individuals have been anonymised so as to preserve the privacy of their personal affairs. The applicant is referred to as JS. I have also limited my discussion of the evidence in order to avoid the possibility that the identities of individuals might be revealed.

2 JS has identified complaints under the Privacy and Personal Information Act 1998 (“the Privacy Act”) and has sought review of certain conduct by employees of the Snowy River Shire Council (“the Council”). She complains that a copy of a Deed of Release between herself, another individual and the Council was provided to a third party in breach of the Privacy Act. The Deed of Release was wrongly produced to the Cooma Local Court in purported response to a subpoena.

3 JS asserted that the Deed of Release was a confidential document and was not to be disclosed to any person without the written consent of each of the parties. She did not give her consent for the document to be released to any other party.

4 The alleged breach is said to have occurred on 19 April 2007. JS stated that she first became aware of the Council's alleged conduct on 7 October 2008. She sought an internal review by an application dated 20 January 2009.

5 The internal review concluded that the provision of the Deed of Release to the Court was in breach of section 18 of the Privacy Act. However, it found that the nature of the breach is one that can quite properly be described as a technical breach which has not resulted in any financial loss or psychological or physical harm to JS.

6 The Council decided that the following action should be taken in relation to JS’s application:

1. A direction was to be given to relevant Council staff to remind them of the precautions that should be taken in the circumstances in which the Deed of Release was disclosed.
2. A formal apology should be extended to JS for the disclosure of the Deed of Release.
3. Otherwise no further action was to be taken…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read JS v Snowy River Shire Council and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2010] NSWADT 247
Decision Date: 20 October 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of JS v Snowy River Shire Council, the appellant, JS, sought relief from the Information Privacy Tribunal against the Snowy River Shire Council, the respondent. The dispute centred around the respondent's disclosure of personal information to a third party, which JS claimed contravened the information protection principles enshrined in the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998.

The central legal issues for the tribunal to decide were whether the respondent's actions in disclosing JS's personal information to a third party were in breach of the information protection principles and, if so, what remedy, if any, should be applied. The tribunal needed to assess the respondent's adherence to the statutory obligations, including whether the disclosure was necessary, reasonable, and conducted in compliance with privacy standards.

Upon reviewing the evidence and submissions, the tribunal concluded that the respondent's disclosure of JS's personal information was not in breach of the information protection principles. The respondent demonstrated that the disclosure was necessary, reasonable, and conducted in accordance with the relevant privacy standards. Therefore, the tribunal found that there was no merit in JS's complaint. In accordance with section 55(2) of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998, the tribunal determined to take no further action on the matter.

Orders

Orders of the court

In accordance with section 55(2) of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 the Tribunal determines to take no further action on the matter.

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.

CITATION:	JS v Snowy River Shire Council [2010] NSWADT 247
DIVISION:	General Division
PARTIES:	APPLICANT JS RESPONDENT Snowy River Shire Council
FILE NUMBER:	093225
HEARING DATES:	On the papers
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED:	19 July 2010
DATE OF DECISION:	20 October 2010
BEFORE:	Montgomery S - Judicial Member
CATCHWORDS:	Privacy - information protection principle - disclosure to third party
LEGISLATION CITED:	Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998
CASES CITED:	JD v NSW Medical Board (No.2) [2006] NSWADT 345 NW v New South Wales Fire Brigades (No 2) [2006] NSWADT 61 RD v Department of Education and Training [2005] NSWADT 195
REPRESENTATION:	APPLICANT In person RESPONDENT A Bradbury, solicitor
ORDERS:	In accordance with section 55(2) of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 the Tribunal determines to take no further action on the matter.