In O and Professional Association [2011] AICmrCN 9 the Privacy Commissioner considered the operation of NPP 6.1 , requiring an organisation that holds personal information about an individual to  provide that person with access to that information unless exceptions apply, and NPP 6.2 which provides that an organisation may need not to provide direct access to information that will reveal commercially sensitive decision making processes if it gives an explanation for the commercially sensitive decision.

FACTS

The complainant sought access to a completed and marked exam paper and the associated documents which were used to mark and rate his/her performance along with the application for special consideration and all relevant documentation used in assessment of that application from a professional association. The professional association provided the complainant with a copy of the front page of the exam paper and the multiple choice sheet that contained his/her personal information as well as a copy of the application for special consideration but it refused to provide the complainant with access to the rest of the documents requested, including working papers for marking.  The professional association publishes an explanation of its marking process on its website and offers exam participants online access to a detailed personal analysis letter, outlining the reasons for an adverse decision, as well as the opportunity to contact it with specific questions regarding his/her personal analysis.

DECISION

The Commissioner found was of the view that the documents used to assess the exam and the application for special consideration contained personal information relating to the complainant and information on the method used by the professional association; including the formula and weighting information used in the assessment and decision making about the individual.  The Commissioner formed the view that providing access to these documents would reveal evaluative information generated in connection with the commercially sensitive decision making process of the Professional Association. The Commissioner was also of the view that the professional association had provided an explanation of the commercially sensitive decision through its personal analysis letter.

The Commissioner declined to investigate the complaint under sectin 41(1).