AHC v Fire and Rescue New South Wales AHC v Charles Sturt University [2012] NSWADT 258

AHC v Fire and Rescue New South Wales AHC v Charles Sturt University [2012] NSWADT 258

The Tribunal held that the academic information the subject of the incidents was, in the relevant context, information about the applicant's suitability for appointment or employment as a public sector official, and thus not 'personal information' for the purposes of the PPIP Act by virtue of s 4(3)(j)....

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 December 2012
Procedural Posture
External Review (privacy/information) / Liability Preliminary Issue
Outcome
No further action taken; liability not established.
Legal Topics
['personal Information Exclusion' 'information Protection Principles' 'suitability for Appointment as Public Sector Official']
['administrative Law' 'privacy Law'] ['personal Information Exclusion' 'information Protection Principles' 'suitability for Appointment as Public Sector Official']

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

External Review (privacy/information) / Liability Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether information about applicant's academic records and qualifications is personal information under the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (PPIP Act) or excluded under s 4(3)(j) as information about suitability for appointment or employment as a public sector official." 'Whether the conduct of Fire and Rescue New South Wales and Charles Sturt University breached the collection, protection and security, use, or disclosure information protection principles.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that the academic information the subject of the incidents was, in the relevant context, information about the applicant's suitability for appointment or employment as a public sector official, and thus not 'personal information' for the purposes of the PPIP Act by virtue of s 4(3)(j). Consequently, there was no breach of any information protection principle by either respondent.

Court Disposition

No further action taken; liability not established.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to subsection 55(2) of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998, the Tribunal takes no further action in this matter.']