1 Feb 2011, 09:00

A man attended a function run by a community organisation to which he belonged. The organisation later received several complaints about the man's aggressive behaviour at the function, including that he had struck another man who had asked him to leave.

The man asked the organisation for copies of the complaints it received about him. The organisation gave him a summary of the complaints, but refused to give him copies because it thought it couldn't do this without identifying who had made the complaints.

The man asked us to review the organisation's decision.

Principle 6

Principle 6 provides that individuals are entitled to have access to personal information that an agency holds about them, unless one of the exceptions set out in sections 27-29 of the Privacy Act (the 'Act') applies.

Section 42(2) of the Act states that agencies must make information available in the way preferred by the individual requesting it unless, among other things, it would prejudice interests protected by sections 27 - 29 and there is no countervailing public interest.

The organisation had given the man a summary of information in the complaints it had received, but did not want to give him copies of those complaints.

We were satisfied that the writers of the complaints would be identifiable to the man from the details in their letters, even with their names removed. We considered that the summary the organisation gave the man contained all the information it could provide without identifying who wrote each complaint.

It was our view that the organisation could withhold copies of the complaints under sections 29(1)(a) and 27(1)(d) of the Act.

Section 27(1)(d)

Section 27(1)(d) allows an agency to withhold personal information if disclosing it would be likely to endanger the safety of any individual.

This ground requires that there is a real or substantial risk to an individual's physical safety. 'Real or substantial' means that the risk could well occur, but does not require that the danger is more likely to occur than not.

A history of violent behaviour is persuasive when we consider an organisation's ability to withhold information under section 27(1)(d).

We considered that because the man had already struck another member of the organisation and behaved aggressively to others at the function, and on other occasions, there was a real risk that he may act violently if he were to receive copies of the complaints and identify who wrote them.

It was our view that this was enough to establish that releasing copies of the complaints would be likely to endanger the safety of others and the organisation could rely on section 27(1)(d) to refuse his request for the information.

Section 29(1)(a)

Section 29(1)(a) allows an agency to withhold personal information if releasing it would be an unwarranted disclosure of someone else's affairs.

The man had an interest in learning about what he had been accused of doing at the function, but we were not satisfied that outweighed the privacy interests of the people who had made complaints about him.

It was clear from the complaints that the writers found the man very unpleasant to deal with and that they were concerned about having difficulties with him at future functions the organisation ran.

In these circumstances, we formed the view that it would be unwarranted to give the man information about the people who had complained about him.

December 2011

Access to personal information - right to receive information in the form it was requested - request for information about who made complaints - release of information likely to endanger safety of others - unwarranted disclosure of another's affairs - Privacy Act 1993 sections 27(1)(d), 29(1)(a); principle 6