NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: CYH v Family and Community Services [2018] NSWCATAD 84 Hearing dates: 21 and 22 March 2018 Date of orders: 17 April 2018 Decision date: 17 April 2018 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: C Ludlow, Senior Member Decision: 1. The respondent is to pay to the applicant damages in the sum of $4,539.41.
2. The respondent is to do everything reasonably within its power to ensure that the Client Information Forms relating to the applicant's children currently held by Child and Adolescent Specialist Programs and Accommodation are protected against unauthorised use or disclosure. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Privacy – retention and security of personal information – request not to disclose personal information to a specific body - disclosure of personal information – whether individual is reasonably likely to be aware that information of that kind is usually disclosed to a person or body – whether disclosure lawfully authorised, or non-compliance permitted, necessarily implied or reasonably contemplated under another Act - prevention of unauthorised use or disclosure of the information – financial loss or damage – principles of causation – compensation. Legislation Cited: Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW) Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Regulation 2012 (NSW) Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW) Cases Cited: Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd v GSF Australia Pty Ltd (2005) [2005] HCA 26 ALZ v WorkCover NSW (No 2) [2014] NSWCATAD 122 BZX, BZY & BZZ v Western Sydney Local Health District [2015] NSWCATAD 210 CPJ v The University of Newcastle [2017] NSWCATAD 350 JD v NSW Medical Board (No.2) [2006] NSWADT 345 NZ v Department of Housing [2006] NSWADT 173 Roads and Traffic Authority v Royal [2008] HCA 18 WT v Auburn Council [2007] NSWADT 253 Category: Principal judgment Parties: CYH (Applicant) Family and Community Services NSW (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr A Edwards (Applicant) Ms M Neville (Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate