The High Court of New Zealand in C v Holland has considerably advanced the tort of privacy in New Zealand jurisprudence.

FACTS

The facts are uncontroverted and set out in [2].  The salient facts are:

• in June 2008 the defendant and the plaintiff’s boyfriend purchased a 5 bedroom house where they both resided;
• for  2 years, the plaintiff stayed at the property approximately 4 nights per week before moving in with Mr Z in July 2010;
• on a single occasion, in the period between 27 December 2010 and 9 January 2011, the defendant used a handheld digital camera to record 2 video clips of the plaintiff in the bathroom.  Each of the videos show the plaintiff both partially dressed and completely naked with clear view of her front (pubic area and breasts) and back. ;
• the defendant downloaded the 2 video clips onto his external hard drive;
• there was no evidence that the defendant published or showed the video clips to any person or entity; and
• the plaintiff did not consent to the defendant watching her in the shower or taking the video clips.

The video clips were discovered by the plaintiff’s boyfriend and the plaintiff made a complaint to the police.  The defendant was charged under the Crimes Act (in making an intimate visual recording),  was convicted and ordered to pay $1,000 in emotional harm reparation.

The plaintiff commenced proceedings against the Defendant.

DECISION

The Court identified Read the rest of this entry »

Yesterday the House of Representatives passed yesterday. As is the way of it the Attorney General has issued a media release, which provides:

The House of Representatives has today passed important reforms to the Privacy Act 1988 that will better protect people’s personal information, simplify credit reporting arrangements and strengthen enforcement powers of the Privacy Commissioner.

Attorney-General Nicola Roxon said that these reforms represent the most significant changes to the Act since Labor introduced the Privacy Act in 1988.

 “Australians right Read the rest of this entry »

The Age today has launched a series on privacy.  Very commendable and apposite given the recent controversy on photographs of Kate Middleton.  The article You’re being more closely watched, is a good opening.

It provides:

AUSTRALIANS’ privacy protections have been eroded more than in any other country since the 9/11 attacks in the United States, experts warn.

Over the past decade Australia and its Western allies in the ”war against terror”, including the US, Britain and France, have collected more information about their citizens’ movements in an effort to prevent further terrorist attacks.

Concerns about dwindling privacy protections come as two separate government inquiries into changes in Australia’s major privacy laws continue.

”We’ve gone further Read the rest of this entry »

The ABC has an interesting piece on the use of drones and the associated (lack of) privacy protections.  It is found here.

It provides:

Australian Privacy Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim has warned it may be impossible to use Australia’s privacy laws to prevent someone from being filmed secretly in their own home by a drone.

He says he is confident the Federal Privacy Act would control the actions of government agencies or businesses operating a drone for surveillance.

However, Commissioner Pilgrim has told Radio National’s Background Briefing program the act does not apply to individuals.

“Perhaps one of your neighbours buys one of these things and starts flying it around your local street,” he said.

“What I am not sure about is whether we have sufficient laws to cover the activities of those individuals.

“For example the Federal Privacy Act doesn’t cover the activities of individuals and so in the context of the use of drones, the Act I administer wouldn’t come into play.”

 Commissioner Pilgrim has called on governments Read the rest of this entry »

A French magazine, Closer, has brought the issue of privacy to prominence with its purchase and publication of  photographs of a topless Kate Middleton by a swimming pool while on a private holiday in Provence. The story is found here.  The Guardian reports that the Royal couple are to sue publication for an invasion of privacy.  As does the ABC and the Age.  The action will be under French civil law which has a far stronger privacy protections to those in the UK and other common law countries.

In the United Kingdom the tort of misuse of private information has developed rapidly to protect private information.  It’s genesis in the modern era is the House of Lords decisions of  Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] 2 AC 247 and Douglas v Hello! Ltd [2008] 1 AC 1. The basis of those proceedings was a claim for breach of confidence (described as a misuse of private information).  Since Campbell “privacy” actions have developed to involve a more systematic application of the Articles 8 and 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 as well as consideration of equitable breach of confidence principles.  The current state of the law is best summarised in McKennitt v Ash [2008] QB 73 where  Buxton LJ stated at [8]:

i) There is no English domestic law tort of invasion of privacy. Previous suggestions in a contrary sense were dismissed by Lord Hoffmann, whose speech was agreed with in full by Lord Hope of Craighead and Lord Hutton, in Wainwright v Home Office [2004] 2 AC 406 [28]-[35].

ii) Accordingly, in developing a right to protect private information Read the rest of this entry »

In today’s Punch, There’s no hiding the horror of a world without privacy, there is a reasonable article on privacy and intrusive technology.

It provides:

Young kids are growing up in an environment where it is normal to disclose their every thought, location and photo to friends and strangers alike on social media. Integrated technology allows businesses and governments to compile a dossier of information about your finances and personal life with every transaction.

Even now, with so much of your habits unwittingly disclosed by what you buy and look at online, you’ve shared more with your ISP than your own family probably knows. Without doubt, there is more information about you floating in the ether at the moment than you realise. Numberplate tracking, loyalty programs, website caching, online purchases and banking data, medical info, download histories… even your current location thanks to the GPS on the smartphone in your pocket.

And, as a bonus Read the rest of this entry »

Today the Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Bill was read a second time.

The Attorney General’s Second Reading Speech provides:

The Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Bill 2012 is one of the most significant developments in privacy reform since Labor introduced the act in 1988.

With this bill Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook and privacy may not be strangers but they only have passing awareness of each other.  Having just resolved a breach of an agreement in America Facebook finds itself being investigated, again, in Germany for retaining biometric data without consent.

The article in out-law.com provides:

German privacy regulator re-opens investigation into Facebook facial recognition feature