WT v Auburn Council

[2007] NSWADT 253

CITATION:	WT v Auburn Council [2007] NSWADT 253
DIVISION:	General Division
PARTIES:	APPLICANT WT RESPONDENT Auburn Council
FILE NUMBER:	063181
HEARING DATES:	18 May 2007
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED:	18 May 2007
DATE OF DECISION:	18 October 2007
BEFORE:	Higgins S - Judicial Member
CATCHWORDS:	Privacy - information protection principle - disclosure to third party
MATTER FOR DECISION:	Principal matter
LEGISLATION CITED:	Local Government Act 1993 Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998
CASES CITED:	JD v NSW Medical Board (No.2) [2006] NSWADT 345 NW v NSW Fire Brigade (No.2) [2006] NSWADT 61 NZ v Director General Department of Housing [2006] NSWADT 173 GR v Department of Housing (No.2) [2005] NSWADT 301 RD v Department of Education and Training [2005] NSWADT 195 Re Rummery & The Federal Privacy Commissioner & Anor [2004] AATA 1221
REPRESENTATION:	APPLICANT In person RESPONDENT R Oldfield, solicitor
ORDERS:	Pursuant to section 55(2)(a) of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998, the Auburn Council is to pay to the applicant damages in the sum of $5,000.

Background

1 This is an application by WT (‘the applicant’), seeking review of the action taken by Auburn Council (‘the respondent’) in respect to conduct by the respondent, which was conduct that breached the disclosure ‘information protection principle’ as set out under s.18 of the Privacy and Personal Information Act 1998 (‘the PPIP Act’). The conduct in question was the respondent’s disclosure, to Moray & Agnew Solicitors, of documents it held containing personal information about the applicant and his property. Moray & Agnew Solicitors, who were acting on behalf of the insurer, NRMA Insurance, had requested the documents under s.12 of the Local Government Act 1993, for the purpose of defending the applicant’s proposed claim for compensation for personal injuries he had suffered as a result of a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 25 February 2002. On becoming aware of the disclosure, on 18 January 2006, pursuant to s.53 of the PPIP Act, the applicant made a request to the respondent for internal review in respect to that conduct.

2 In its internal review notification to the applicant, the respondent acknowledged that the disclosure of the documents had been a disclosure contrary to s.18 of the PPIP Act. At the same time the respondent contended that it was an ‘unintentional’ disclosure as the relevant officer of the respondent had ‘… incorrectly relied on written advice provided by Moray & Agnew that the documents sought were available under Section 12 of the Local Government Act 1993.’ The respondent has not resiled from this position and the matter has proceeded before the tribunal on the basis that the disclosure of the documents to Moray & Agnew was a breach of s.18 of the PPIP Act.

3 The action the respondent proposed as a result of the contravention was training and ongoing training sessions for all officers engaged in dealing with requests for the disclosure of information held by the respondent, training for newly engaged staff, the issue of a formal apology to…