pdf (146.57 KB)

Case Citation:

L v Commonwealth Agency [2010] PrivCmrA 14

Subject Heading:

Improper disclosure of personal information

Law:

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

The following case was decided by the Privacy Commissioner prior to 1 November 2010. On 1 November 2010 all the powers of the Privacy Commissioner under the Privacy Act were conferred on the Australian Information Commissioner.

Facts:

The complainant made adverse comments in the media and on a blog about the way an Australian government agency handled an application they had made. The agency received several enquiries from the media about the issues and disclosed the complainant's personal information in responding to those enquiries. A journalist included that information in an article.

The complainant alleged that the agency improperly disclosed their personal information to the journalist.

Issues:

IPP 11 prohibits agencies from disclosing personal information to anyone other than the individual concerned, unless an exception applies. 

The exception at IPP 11.1(a) permits disclosure where the individual concerned is reasonably likely to have been aware, or made aware under Principle 2, that information of that kind is usually passed to that person, body or agency.

Outcome:

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

The Commissioner's Plain English Guidelines to Information Privacy Principles 8-11 provide examples of when an individual may be considered to be reasonably likely to be aware that information may be disclosed under IPP 11.1(a). The Guidelines state:

a person who complains publicly about an agency in relation to their circumstances (for example, to the media) is considered to be reasonably likely to be aware that the agency may respond publicly - and in a way that reveals personal information relevant to the issues they have raised.

The Commissioner took into account that the complainant had complained publicly about the agency's handling of their application. The information provided by the agency was confined to responding to the issues raised publicly by the complainant.  The Commissioner considered that the complainant was reasonably likely to have been aware that the agency may respond, in the way it did, to the issues raised. Therefore, the Commissioner took a preliminary view that IPP 11.1(a) permitted that disclosure. 

The complainant subsequently withdrew the complaint and the matter was closed.

Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
December 2010