BGQ v Sydney Local Health District [2014] NSWCATAD 174

BGQ v Sydney Local Health District [2014] NSWCATAD 174

The applicant did not identify conduct by the respondent that constituted a contravention or alleged contravention of any Health Privacy Principle, Information Protection Principle, or applicable privacy code of practice. Her concerns were directed at preventing possible future breaches and seeking changes to record instructions. Because the conduct complained of was not conduct within section 52 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 and the applicant was not a person aggrieved by such conduct for section 53, the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction and the application had to be dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for External Administrative Review Concerning Health Information Privacy / On the Papers; Preliminary Jurisdiction and Dismissal Application
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['health Privacy Principles' 'information Protection Principles' 'anonymity and De Identification of Health Records' 'internal Review and External Review' 'tribunal Jurisdiction' 'misconceived or Lacking in Substance Proceedings']
['privacy Law' 'health Information Privacy' 'administrative Law'] ['health Privacy Principles' 'information Protection Principles' 'anonymity and De Identification of Health Records' 'internal Review and External Review' 'tribunal Jurisdiction' 'misconceived or Lacking in Substance Proceedings']

Case Brief

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

Application for External Administrative Review Concerning Health Information Privacy / On the Papers; Preliminary Jurisdiction and Dismissal Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant's internal review request identified conduct by the respondent that was a contravention or alleged contravention of any Health Privacy Principle, Information Protection Principle, or applicable privacy code of practice." 'Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction under Part 5 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 to review the application.' 'Whether the orders sought by the applicant were orders the Tribunal could make under section 55(2) of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998.' 'Whether the application should be dismissed as misconceived or lacking in substance.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not identify conduct by the respondent that constituted a contravention or alleged contravention of any Health Privacy Principle, Information Protection Principle, or applicable privacy code of practice. Her concerns were directed at preventing possible future breaches and seeking changes to record instructions. Because the conduct complained of was not conduct within section 52 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 and the applicant was not a person aggrieved by such conduct for section 53, the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction and the application had to be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The Application is dismissed.']