A woman was represented by a lawyer in an employment matter. She then instructed a new lawyer. The new lawyer made a request on the woman's behalf for copies of all the information held about the woman by her previous lawyer.

The previous lawyer claimed a lien over the file because the account had not been settled. A lien allows a lawyer to retain a client's documents until a bill is paid. He offered to allow the woman to view the file but would not allow the file to be copied or removed. The lawyer argued that withholding a copy of the file until the account was settled was an administratively efficient procedure and that section 42(2)(a) of the Privacy Act allowed this. The woman alleged that this breached principle 6 of the Privacy Act.

I did not agree with the lawyer.

Principle 6

Principle 6 gives people a right to access personal information held about them by agencies. That right is subject to Part V of the Privacy Act (sections 33-45). Section 42 provides that where information is contained in a document, it may be made available in a number of ways, including by providing a copy of the document to the requester. Section 42(2)(a) provides that the agency should make the information available in the way preferred by the requester unless to do so would 'impair efficient administration'.

The lawyer suggested that maintaining a lien was an administratively efficient procedure for the conduct of business because it assists debt recovery. I considered that the concept of efficient administration referred to in section 42(2)(a) was not related to the process of debt recovery.

Upon receiving my opinion, the lawyer made copies of the information available to the woman. I discontinued my investigation on that basis.

Indexing terms: Access to personal information - Lawyer - Solicitor's lien exercised over information - Refusal to supply copies until debt repaid - Making copy available would not 'impair efficient administration' - Privacy Act 1993, s 42(2)(a) - Information privacy principle 6

November 2001