ENS v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2022] NSWCATAD 356

ENS v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2022] NSWCATAD 356

The Tribunal determined that the applicant's initial email was unsolicited and therefore was not collected for the purposes of the PPIP Act; that the agency did not contravene IPPs 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 or 9; and that Mr King did not contravene IPP 11 because a person requesting to join a specific mediation would reasonably be aware that the applicant for mediation would be informed and consulted. In any event, the disclosure was exempt under s 25 because, in arranging mediation under s 218 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW) and r 59 of the Strata Schemes Management Regulation 2016 (NSW), Mr King was lawfully authorised, or non-compliance was necessarily implied, to consult Ms N...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review Under S 55 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (nsw) and S 55 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (nsw) / Final Determination on the Papers
Outcome
The Tribunal determined not to take any action on the matter.
Legal Topics
['information Protection Principles' 'disclosure of Personal Information' 'administrative Review of Agency Conduct' 'mediation of Strata Disputes' 'publication Restriction and Pseudonym Order']
['administrative Law' 'privacy Law' 'strata Schemes'] ['information Protection Principles' 'disclosure of Personal Information' 'administrative Review of Agency Conduct' 'mediation of Strata Disputes' 'publication Restriction and Pseudonym Order']

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

Administrative Review Under S 55 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (nsw) and S 55 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (nsw) / Final Determination on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Commissioner for Fair Trading contravened Information Protection Principles in dealing with the applicant's personal information contained in emails concerning a strata mediation." "Whether Mr King's disclosure to Ms N that ENS had requested to be part of the mediation contravened IPP 11 in s 18 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW)." 'Whether the agency contravened IPPs concerning collection, access, alteration or accuracy of personal information.' 'Whether any non-compliance was exempt under s 25 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW) because it was lawfully authorised or reasonably contemplated by strata mediation legislation.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal determined that the applicant's initial email was unsolicited and therefore was not collected for the purposes of the PPIP Act; that the agency did not contravene IPPs 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 or 9; and that Mr King did not contravene IPP 11 because a person requesting to join a specific mediation would reasonably be aware that the applicant for mediation would be informed and consulted. In any event, the disclosure was exempt under s 25 because, in arranging mediation under s 218 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW) and r 59 of the Strata Schemes Management Regulation 2016 (NSW), Mr King was lawfully authorised, or non-compliance was necessarily implied, to consult Ms N...

Court Disposition

The Tribunal determined not to take any action on the matter.

Orders

  • ['The publication or broadcast of the name of the applicant is prohibited pursuant to s 64(1)(a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.' 'The applicant is to be known by the pseudonym "ENS".' 'The Tribunal determines to take no action on the matter.']