The applicant's failure to make a valid request for personal information was fatal to the case
The Federal Court upheld the dismissal of injunctive relief under the Privacy Act, concluding that the applicant's failure to submit a valid request for personal information was fatal to the claim.
The case involved a request to compel the Australian Information Commissioner to provide access to personal information and to take specific actions as outlined in correspondence from the applicant.
The applicant filed the proceedings seeking relief related to the commissioner's investigation, specific actions arising from prior communications, and damages for alleged tortious conduct. In November 2023, the applicant sought interlocutory orders, including an injunction under the Privacy Act and suppression of case documents. A registrar dismissed these applications on the basis that the injunction request amounted to a fishing expedition and the suppression order lacked justification.
The Federal Court reviewed the registrar’s decision and upheld the dismissal, finding that the evidence did not establish a prima facie case for the requested injunction. The court concluded that the balance of convenience did not support granting the relief sought. It emphasised that the Privacy Act grants individuals the right to access their personal information from an entity under the Australian Privacy Principles (APP), provided they comply with the specific procedural requirements outlined in the Act. The applicant had not demonstrated that a valid request under APP 12 had been made, a prerequisite for relief under the act.
In seeking leave to appeal, the applicant argued that the primary judge failed to consider certain submissions and the effects of provisions in the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 (Cth). Additional grounds for appeal included assertions about constitutional privacy rights and the scope of obligations under the Privacy Act. The applicant also argued that an injunction could be granted without a formal request for information and sought declaratory orders concerning the dismissal of the suppression application.
The Federal Court rejected these arguments and determined that the primary decision was not attended by sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration. It found that the applicant’s failure to make a valid information request under the Privacy Act was fatal to the case. The court also held that the constitutional issues raised were not substantively relevant and that declaratory orders were unnecessary. The court dismissed the application for leave.