Administrative Decisions Tribunal
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: MH v NSW Maritime No 2 [2011] NSWADT 285 Hearing dates: On the papers Decision date: 06 December 2011 Jurisdiction: General Division Before: P H Molony, Judicial Member Decision: 1. I find that the Applicant's internal review request, reasonably construed, required a consideration of whether the conduct complained of breached the provisions of s 12(c) and s 18 of the PPIP Act.
2. Applicant to file and serve any statements, reports or other material upon which he intends to rely by 23 December 2011.
3. Respondent to file and serve any statements, reports or other material upon which it intends to rely by 13 February 2012.
4. Copies of all material relied on by the parties should also be served on the Privacy Commissioner.
5. Application fixed for a further planning meeting on 6 March 2012 at 9.30am.
Catchwords: Privacy and Personal Information Protection - internal review - scope Legislation Cited: Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 Cases Cited: Department of Education and Training v GA (No.3) [2004] NSWADTAP 50
Department of Education and Training v ZR (No 2) (GD) [2009] NSWADTAP 44
KO' & 'KP v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police [2005] NSWADT 18
MH v NSW Maritime [2011] NSWADT 248Category: Separate question Parties: Applicant - MH
Respondent - NSW MaritimeRepresentation: Applicant in person
Respondent – J McDonnell, Crown Solicitors Office
Privacy Commissioner – J McAteer
File Number(s): 113091
REasons for decision
Introduction
[GENERAL DIVISION, P. H. Molony, Judicial Member]. On 15 November 2010 MH requested that NSW Maritime conduct an internal review of the following conduct under s 53 if the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 . He wrote -
1 On 18 October 2010 I learned that Ms Louise Kirychenko (at the relevant time an employee of NSW Maritime) disclosed my personal information to Work Cover New South Wales. The personal information is incorporated in the affidavit I deposed in proceedings commenced by me against NSW Maritime and Mr Steven Dunn on 29 May 2009 ("the Affidavit").
2 The fact that Ms Kirychenko had improper possession and control of the Affidavit is one issue being considered in the current proceedings [MH] v NSW Maritime (No: 103163) before the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. The issue of Ms Kirychenko's disclosure of the Affidavit is a separate and discrete issue.
On 9 December 2010 NSW Maritime wrote to MH advising that it was not aware of any such disclosure and asking if he were able to provide "information to the contrary."
On 11 December 2010 MH responded in highly combative fashion. This set the tone for the ongoing correspondence between NSW Maritime and himself. In that letter he referred to paragraph 8 of the affidavit of Ms Louise Kirychenko, which was tendered on 12 November in [MH] v NSW Maritime (No: 103163), [2011] NSWADT 248 (the earlier proceedings) and to her subsequent cross-examination in those proceedings. He commented that -
11. Ms Kirychenko has already…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read MH v NSW Maritime No 2 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2011] NSWADT 285
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the internal review request by the applicant required a consideration of specific statutory provisions, namely sections 12(c) and 18 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW). The court had to determine whether these provisions were within the scope of the internal review request and if they warranted examination by the respondent. Additionally, the court needed to clarify the procedural requirements for the exchange of material and the scheduling of further hearings.
In its decision, the court found that the applicant's internal review request, when reasonably construed, did require a consideration of whether the conduct complained of breached sections 12(c) and 18 of the PPIP Act. The court emphasised the importance of ensuring that the internal review process was sufficiently comprehensive to address all relevant legal issues. The court ordered the applicant to file and serve any relevant statements, reports, or other material by a specified deadline, and similarly required the respondent to do the same. Furthermore, both parties were instructed to serve copies of all relied-upon material on the Privacy Commissioner. Finally, the court set a date for a further planning meeting to ensure that the case progressed efficiently.
The court's orders included setting deadlines for the filing and serving of material, ensuring transparency and fairness in the review process, and scheduling a planning meeting to manage the case's progression. This decision underscores the necessity for internal review processes to be thorough and inclusive of all pertinent legal considerations.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. I find that the Applicant's internal review request, reasonably construed, required a consideration of whether the conduct complained of breached the provisions of s 12(c) and s 18 of the PPIP Act.
2. Applicant to file and serve any statements, reports or other material upon which he intends to rely by 23 December 2011.
3. Respondent to file and serve any statements, reports or other material upon which it intends to rely by 13 February 2012.
4. Copies of all material relied on by the parties should also be served on the Privacy Commissioner.
5. Application fixed for a further planning meeting on 6 March 2012 at 9.30am.
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.