Case Citation:
 

C v Commonwealth Agency [2009] PrivCmrA 3
 

Subject Heading:

Disclosure of personal information

Law:

Information Privacy Principle 11 in Part III Division 2 of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth)

Facts:

The complainant was receiving a benefit from a Commonwealth government agency.
  The complainant applied for a change to the benefit but was refused.
  Dissatisfied with the agency's decision, the complainant lodged a complaint with the appropriate tribunal in an effort to have the agency's decision changed.
 

When the tribunal was hearing the complainant's matter, the complainant viewed the documents that the agency had provided to the tribunal for its consideration.
  The complainant claimed that those documents were not relevant to the matter being heard.
  They claimed that the disclosure of the personal information in those documents was unnecessary.
  The agency claimed that it was obliged to provide those documents to the tribunal.

Issues:

IPP 11 prohibits agencies from disclosing personal information to anyone other than the individual concerned, unless an exception applies.
  IPP 11.1(d) states that an agency may disclose personal information if the disclosure is required or authorised by law.
 

Outcome:

The Privacy Commissioner investigated the matter under section 40(1) of the Privacy
 Act.
 

The Commissioner confirmed that the role of the particular tribunal is to review complaints about an agency's decision or conduct.
  In doing so, the tribunal is required to notify the complainant and the agency if the matter is to be reviewed.
  The tribunal also has powers vested in it by its governing legislation that allow it to obtain information from the agency to review the matter at hand.
  The agency is required to provide the information to the tribunal within 28 days of the notice being issued.
 
 

In this instance, the Commissioner found that the tribunal issued the agency with a written notice in accordance with its governing legislation.
  That notice required that the agency provide the tribunal with copies of those documents that the agency considered relevant to its decision concerning the complainant's benefit.
 

The agency reviewed all of the information that it held about the complainant and provided to the tribunal only copies of the documents that it considered relevant to the complainant's matter.

The notice issued to the agency by the tribunal did allow the agency to consider what information might be relevant to the matter.
  The Commissioner found that this was permissible under the terms of the governing legislation and then turned her mind to the issue of relevance.

The Commissioner considered that for information to be relevant to the matter at hand, it should have some bearing on, or be connected to, that same matter.
  The Commissioner was satisfied that the agency had properly considered whether all of the information it held about the complainant was relevant to the matter being reviewed by the tribunal, and had only provided the tribunal with that information in response to its notice.

The Commissioner formed the view that the agency had met the obligations imposed by IPP 11.1(d) in that it was required by law to disclose to the tribunal all of the information that it held about the complainant if it considered that information
  relevant.
 

The Commissioner closed the complaint under section 41(1)(a) of the Privacy Act on the basis that the agency had not interfered with the complainant's privacy.

OFFICE OF THE PRIVACY COMMISSIONER

May 2009