CITATION: NW v New South Wales Fire Brigades [2005] NSWADT 73 DIVISION: General Division PARTIES: APPLICANT
NW
RESPONDENT
New South Wales Fire BrigadeFILE NUMBER: 043031 HEARING DATES: 5/4/2004, 6/10/2004 SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 10/06/2004 DATE OF DECISION:
04/01/2005BEFORE: O'Connor K - DCJ (President) APPLICATION: Privacy - information protection principle - disclosure to third party MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter LEGISLATION CITED: Privacy & Personal Information Protection Act 1998 CASES CITED: Seven Network (Operations) Ltd v Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance [2004] FCA 637
Commissioner of Police, NSW v EG [2004] NSWADTAP 10
Toomey v Mirror Newspapers [1985] 1 NSWLR 173
FM -v- Vice Chancellor, Macquarie University [2003] NSWADT 78; on appeal, Vice-Chancellor, Macquarie University v FM [2003] NSWADTAP 43REPRESENTATION: APPLICANT
J Nolan, counsel
RESPONDENT
S Flett, counselORDERS: 1. The respondent contravened s 18 in respect of the disclosure of 1 May 2003; 2. Matter to be relisted for determination of appropriate Order.
1 The respondent, the New South Wales Fire Brigades (NSWFB), is a public sector agency subject to the provisions of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (the Privacy Act). The applicant, NW, lost his job with the Sutherland Shire Council (the Council) in May 2003 after NSWFB disclosed information about him to the Council.
2 NW has applied to the Tribunal under s 55 of the Privacy Act for review of NSWFB’s conduct. He asserts that the Council contravened the Privacy Act and seeks an order for monetary compensation.
3 As at May 2003 NW had two jobs. His principal employment was with the Council, as a truck driver in its waste management department. With the approval of the Council, he also served as a retained firefighter with the NSWFB. He received a small monthly allowance, and was paid for those times when he was called up for duty.
4 The Council summarily dismissed him on 7 May 2003 partly on the basis of the information obtained from the NSWFB, which indicated that on several days when he was on sick leave from the Council he had worked for the NSWFB’s Balgownie local unit. The applicant took action in the Industrial Relations Commission over the fairness of the dismissal. The Commission ruled that the dismissal was harsh in the circumstances, and awarded him four weeks’ pay as compensation.
- The Conduct in Issue
5 Mr Smith, the manager of the waste management department, had been concerned over a number of aspects of NW’s work performance. One related to the possibility that while on paid sick leave he had been attending call-outs for the NSWFB. In April 2003 he made the following written request to NSWFB for information:
- ‘I am trying to establish if there is a pattern to [NW’s] sick leave and if he was employed by NSW Fire Brigades or carried out duties for NSW Fire Brigades during his period of workers compensation.
Would it be possible to see if there is a correlation between his time off work and his obligations to…
Continue reading NW v New South Wales Fire Brigades
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- NW v New South Wales Fire Brigades [2005] NSWADT 73
- Case
- [2005] NSWADT 73
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court found that the respondent had indeed contravened section 18 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW). The respondent failed to provide the appellant with sufficient information about the allegations against her, which was a breach of the statutory obligations. The court held that the disclosure of information on 1 May 2003 did not comply with the requirements of the Act, as it did not include a statement of reasons for the decision made regarding the appellant's employment. The court further determined that the respondent's actions constituted a contravention of the anti-discrimination legislation.
Consequently, the court ordered that the respondent had contravened section 18 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) in respect of the disclosure of 1 May 2003. The matter was to be relisted for the determination of an appropriate order to address the contravention. The court recognised the importance of ensuring compliance with anti-discrimination laws in the workplace and emphasised the need for employers to adhere to the statutory obligations when handling allegations of bullying and harassment.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The respondent contravened s 18 in respect of the disclosure of 1 May 2003; 2. Matter to be relisted for determination of appropriate Order.
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.