Madzikanda v Australian Information Commissioner [2023] FCA 1445

Federal Court of Australia

Madzikanda v Australian Information Commissioner [2023] FCA 1445 File number(s): VID 594 of 2021

Judgment of: WHEELAHAN J

Date of judgment: 24 November 2023

Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — application for judicial review of a decision of a delegate of the Australian Information Commissioner under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) – where the applicant complained to the Commissioner under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) that his former employer had interfered with his privacy under the Act regarding personal information, in the form of personal emails and passwords to email and cloud-based storage accounts, stored on his former work laptop – where the delegate decided not to investigate the complaint further because he was not satisfied that interference with privacy was established or alternatively that further investigation was not warranted in all the circumstances – where pursuant to s 5(1)(a) of ADJR Act the applicant alleged apprehended bias and breaches of the duty to provide a fair opportunity to be heard against delegate regarding the delegate's treatment of the evidence in the delegate's decision and certain of the delegate's conclusions – where pursuant to ss 5(1)(e) and 5(2)(b) of ADJR Act the applicant alleged various failures to take into account relevant considerations or the taking into account of irrelevant considerations – where pursuant to 5(1)(f) of ADJR Act the applicant alleged errors of law – where pursuant to s 5(1)(g) of ADJR Act the applicant alleged the delegate's decision was induced or affected by fraud because the employer had allegedly provided concocted documents to the delegate on which the delegate relied – apprehended bias not shown – breach of duty to afford a fair opportunity to be heard not shown - no failure to take into account relevant considerations and no taking into account of irrelevant considerations – s 41(1)(da) discretion not to further investigate where the delegate satisfied further investigation not warranted in all circumstances is broad and makes the Commissioner the administrative gatekeeper of complaints about breaches of privacy – Privacy Act does not create a directly and immediately enforceable scheme of rights in relation to privacy – the delegate exercised the s 41(1)(da) discretion validly and independently of any alleged errors of law such that any alleged errors of law were not material – fraud allegations not material because allegedly concocted documents were not a necessary element of the delegate's reasoning – application dismissed