Case Citation: 

A v Licensed Club [2007] PrivCmrA 1

Subject Heading:

Disclosure of personal information by a licensed club.

Law:

National Privacy Principle 2 in Schedule 3 of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).

Facts:

The complainant was a member of a licensed club.  The complainant claimed that they and their partner had been harassed by two individuals visiting the complainant's house. One of the individuals was a long-time ex-partner of the complainant.  According to the complainant the individuals told the manager of the club that they were friends of the complainant and the manager then allegedly gave them the complainant's address.  Allegedly, the club manager also made comments to the individuals about the complainant's drinking habits.

The complainant wrote to the licensed club outlining the allegations and describing the embarrassment and distress which the complainant and their partner had suffered as a result of the alleged disclosure.  The licensed club did not respond to the complainant in writing but suggested a face-to-face meeting with the complainant.  The complainant stated that the licensed club's representative failed to attend the meeting and did nothing further to address their complaint.  The complainant wrote to the Privacy Commissioner unsatisfied with the response of the licensed club.

Issues:

National Privacy Principle 2.1 provides that an organisation must not use or disclose personal information about an individual for a purpose other than the primary purpose of the collection unless an exception in National Privacy Principle 2.1(a)-(h) applies.

The issues for the Commissioner were firstly whether the alleged disclosure occurred and secondly whether an exception to National Privacy Principle 2 applied.

Outcome:

The Commissioner opened an investigation into the matter under section 40(1) of the Privacy Act.  Specifically, the Commissioner sought information from the licensed club regarding the allegations that the complainant's personal information had been disclosed to the individuals on their request and if so, how the disclosure complied with National Privacy Principle 2 in the Privacy Act. 

In responding to the Commissioner the licensed club advised that it would prefer to attempt to resolve the matter by conciliation. 

The Commissioner received further information from the complainant's legal representative who stated that the complainant had received telephone calls which has resulted in the complainant feeling unsafe.  The complainant subsequently relocated from the suburb in which the incident took place.  The complainant's legal representative advised that the complainant was seeking compensation for costs associated with the relocation.  The complainant also sought compensation for loss of income sustained after the relocation. 

The licensed club offered the complainant an amount of compensation in full and final settlement of the complaint.  The complainant and the club signed a deed of release and a confidential amount of compensation was paid to the complainant.

The Commissioner then decided to cease the investigation under section 41(2)(a) on the grounds that the licensed club had dealt adequately with the complaint.

OFFICE OF THE PRIVACY COMMISSIONER

April 2007