Jackson v The University of New South Wales (No 2) [2018] NSWCATAD 271

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Jackson v The University of New South Wales (No 2) [2018] NSWCATAD 271 Hearing dates: 18 July 2018 Date of orders: 27 November 2018 Decision date: 27 November 2018 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: S Montgomery, Senior Member Decision: The Tribunal decides to take no further action. Catchwords: Administrative Law – Privacy - personal information held by an agency - review of conduct of agency - contravention of the information protection principles concerning personal information - disclosure of the applicant's personal information by an officer of the agency - whether alleged loss or damage suffered because of the alleged contravention by the agency Legislation Cited: Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 Cases Cited: Nil Texts Cited: Nil Category: Principal judgment Parties: Trevor Jackson (Applicant) The University of New South Wales (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: T Jackson (Applicant in person) B Tronson (Respondent)

Solicitors: Legal Office UNSW Sydney (Respondent) File Number(s): 2016/00378509 Publication restriction: Nil

Reasons for Decision

Introduction 1. Mr Jackson applied to the Tribunal for review of a determination by the University of New South Wales ("the University" of "UNSW") in relation to a complaint that he made in April 2016 about conduct of an officer of the University. His complaint was brought under the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 ("the PPIP Act") seeking review of a decision made by the University. 2. The Tribunal's jurisdiction is governed by section 55 of the PPIP Act. That jurisdiction arises only where there has been an application for internal review of conduct pursuant to section 53. 3. The background to the application is set out in my decision recorded as Jackson v The University of New South Wales [2018] NSWCATAD12 ("the liability decision"). 4. In that matter I considered whether the University had breached any Information Protection Principles ("IPPs") contained in the PPIP Act. I found that the University's conduct had breached section 17 of the PPIP Act through the actions of Mr Serov in sending an email to Mr Mooney on 9 February 2016 (copied to Professor Poole-Warren) and in sending an email to Mr Mooney on 12 February 2016 (not copied to Professor Poole-Warren). 5. The matter came before me again on 18 July 2018, to determine the consequences of the breaches. Prior to the hearing the University offered Mr Jackson a written apology and outlined the steps that have been taken, and will be taken, to ensure that such breaches are unlikely to reoccur. Mr Jackson rejected that apology.