DMW and DMX v NSW Rural Fire Service [2019] NSWCATAD 158

DMW and DMX v NSW Rural Fire Service [2019] NSWCATAD 158

The OEH email to the RFS was unsolicited and, in any event, its referral was reasonably necessary between public sector agencies, so there was no breach concerning collection. Mr Neilsen checked the information with DMW and used it for the same or a directly related hazard reduction purpose, so there was no breach concerning use. The 18 October email to the Council was sent so that the Council could investigate possible unauthorised vegetation clearing, and that disclosure was for law enforcement purposes within section 23(5)(a), so the RFS was exempt from complying with section 18. The RFS did breach section 14 by not providing access without excessive delay or expense, but the apology...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Conduct Under the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 / External Review After Internal Review; Final Determination
Outcome
The Tribunal determines to take no further action on the matter.
Legal Topics
['collection of Personal Information' 'use of Personal Information' 'disclosure of Personal Information' 'access to Personal Information' 'information Protection Principles' 'law Enforcement Purposes' 'public Sector Agency Information Exchange']
['administrative Law' 'privacy Law'] ['collection of Personal Information' 'use of Personal Information' 'disclosure of Personal Information' 'access to Personal Information' 'information Protection Principles' 'law Enforcement Purposes' 'public Sector Agency Information Exchange']

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 of Conduct Under the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 / External Review After Internal Review; Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the RFS collected the Applicants' personal information in breach of the PPIP Act when it received an email from the OEH." "Whether the RFS used the Applicants' personal information in breach of the PPIP Act when refusing a hazard reduction certificate." "Whether the RFS disclosed the Applicants' personal information in breach of the PPIP Act by sending the 18 October email to the Council." "Whether the RFS breached the PPIP Act by failing to provide access to the Applicants' personal information without excessive delay or expense." 'What action, if any, should be taken under section 55(2) of the PPIP Act.']

Ratio Decidendi

The OEH email to the RFS was unsolicited and, in any event, its referral was reasonably necessary between public sector agencies, so there was no breach concerning collection. Mr Neilsen checked the information with DMW and used it for the same or a directly related hazard reduction purpose, so there was no breach concerning use. The 18 October email to the Council was sent so that the Council could investigate possible unauthorised vegetation clearing, and that disclosure was for law enforcement purposes within section 23(5)(a), so the RFS was exempt from complying with section 18. The RFS did breach section 14 by not providing access without excessive delay or expense, but the apology...

Court Disposition

The Tribunal determines to take no further action on the matter.

Orders

  • ['The Tribunal determines to take no further action on the matter.']