Saffari v Australian Information Commissioner

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Saffari v Australian Information Commissioner [2022] FCA 1016  

File number(s):

NSD 912 of 2021

Judgment of:

BROMWICH J

Date of judgment:

2 September 2022

Catchwords:

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – application for judicial review of a decision of the Australian Information Commissioner – where the Commissioner determined that Amazon Australia Services Inc had interfered with the applicant’s privacy contrary to Australian Privacy Principle 6 under schedule 1 of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) – whether the Commissioner’s omission in referring expressly to a letter provided by the applicant in her decision constitutes a reviewable error – whether the relief granted by the Commissioner and the use of the expression “hurt feelings” to describe the applicant’s psychological state was illogical and irrational and thereby legally unreasonable –  held:  application dismissed

Legislation:

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) ss 5(1)(e), 5(1)(f),

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 39B

Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) ss 6, 13(1), 36(1), 40(1), 40A(1), 40A(3), 41(1)(a), 42(2), 52(1), 52(1)(b)(i), 52(1)(b)(i)A, 52(1)(b)(ii)

Cases cited:

Applicant WAEE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCAFC 184; 236 FCR 593

DNA17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCAFC 146

Giddings v Australian Information Commissioner [2017] FCAFC 225

Registry:

New South Wales

National Practice Area:

Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights

Number of paragraphs:

44

Date of hearing:

15 August 2022

Counsel for the Applicant:

The Applicant appeared in person

Counsel for the Respondent:

C Hibbard

Solicitor for the Respondent:

Australian Government Solicitor

ORDERS

NSD 912 of 2021

BETWEEN:

SHAHRIAR SAFFARI

Applicant

AND:

AUSTRALIAN INFORMATION COMMISIONER

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	BROMWICH J
DATE OF ORDER:	2 SEPTEMBER 2022

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The further amended originating application dated 29 April 2022 be dismissed.

2.The applicant pay the respondent’s costs as assessed or agreed.

Note:   Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

BROMWICH J

1. By a further amended originating application (FAOA), the applicant, Mr Shahriar Saffari, seeks judicial review of a decision of the respondent, the Australian Information Commissioner under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) and under s 5(1)(e) and (f) of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) (ADJR Act).  Mr Saffari alleges errors of law in the determination of a complaint he made to the Commissioner about an interference with his privacy by Amazon Commercial Services Pty Ltd and/or Amazon Australia Services Inc, contrary to the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), and in particular contrary to Australian Privacy Principle 6 (APP 6).  The interference with privacy arose by reason of Amazon disclosing Mr Saffari’s identity as the anonymous author of a book that was self-published by him using a service provided by Amazon to enable that to take place.  The disclosure was made by Amazon to a third party, who had complained to Amazon about the book.  That third party has not been identified in this proceeding.

2. On 30…