AFC v The Sydney Children's Hospital Specialty Network (Randwick and Westmead) (No 2) [2013] NSWADT 99

Administrative Decisions Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: AFC v The Sydney Children's Hospital Specialty Network (Randwick and Westmead) (No 2) [2013] NSWADT 99 Hearing dates: On the papers Decision date: 08 May 2013 Jurisdiction: General Division Before: P H Molony, Judicial Member Decision: 1. The Tribunal orders the Agency to apologise in writing to AFC for its conduct in breach of the collection principle in s 10 of the PPIP Act. 2. Otherwise the Tribunal determines not to take any action in the matter. Catchwords: Privacy and Personal Information Protection - meaning of personal information and health information - scope of review - Legislation Cited: Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 Cases Cited: AFC v The Sydney Children's Hospital Specialty Network (Randwick and Westmead) [2012] NSWADT 189 GR v Director-General, Department of Housing [2004] NSWADTAP 25 NW v NSW Fire Brigades (No. 2) [2006] NSWADT 61 HP v Hunter New England Area Health Services [2009] NSWADT 186 JD v NSW Department of Health [2007] NSWADT 219 WT v Auburn Council [2007] NSWADT 253 WT v Auburn Council [2008] NSWADTAP 16 Category: Principal judgment Parties: AFC (Applicant) The Sydney Children's Hospital Specialty Network (Randwick and Westmead) (Respondent) Representation: AFC (Applicant in person) Curwoods Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 113234

REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction 1In AFC v The Sydney Children's Hospital Specialty Network (Randwick and Westmead) [2012] NSWADT 189 I found that The Sydney Children's Hospital Specialty Network (Randwick and Westmead) (the agency) breached the collection principles in s 10 of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (the PPIP Act). A person occupying the position of patients friend at the agency collected personal information from AFC in circumstances in which he was not advised that the information was being collected, who the intended recipients of it were, the purpose for which it was being collected, nor of the existence of a right to access and correct it. 2AFC had made complaints about the conduct of the Agency and its employees in a number of other respects. On external review I found that only conduct of the patients friend breached the collection principle in s 10. Details of those other complaints, and the conduct to which they related, is more fully set out in my earlier decision and will not be repeated here. 3I reserved my decision on the question of what remedy I would order as a result of the breach, and directed the parties to file and serve submissions and materials with respect to that issue, 4The parties have subsequently filed and served submissions. I remain of the view that it is an issue that the Tribunal can determine in the absence of the parties on the papers.