16 Sep 2013, 12:21

A man was concerned that he had been filmed in the men’s toilets of a pub by a fixed CCTV camera. He was initially unaware of the camera’s presence, but had later seen copies of the pictures taken while he was using the bathroom.

The man complained to us that use of a camera in toilet areas was an interference with his privacy. The complaint raised issues under principle 4 of the Privacy Act.

Principle 4 relates to the means by which personal information is collected. It requires that personal information must not be collected by unlawful means, by means that are unfair in the circumstances or by means that unreasonably intrude into an individual’s personal affairs.

The question of what is unreasonably intrusive or unfair involves a consideration of all the circumstances. These include the purpose of the collection, whether the collection was effective to fulfil that purpose, the sensitivity of the information collected, whether realistic alternatives were available that would result in less intrusion into privacy, and whether the collection was overt or covert.

We investigated the complaint. The pub manager informed us that several CCTV cameras were in place on the premises for safety and security reasons. Signs had been positioned around the pub to advise people that they may be filmed. He confirmed that there was a camera operating in the men’s toilet area.

We agreed that it was reasonable for CCTV cameras to be mounted in most public and staff areas for safety and security reasons, since there was a genuine need for them. There was also adequate signage, the footage was only used for safety and security reasons, and there was adequate protection for the information (for example limiting which staff members could access it). We were therefore satisfied that the general use of CCTV in most areas of the pub complied with the Act.

However, the purpose for having a camera in the men’s toilet was not clear. We considered that a camera placed in the men’s toilet area was capturing highly sensitive information in an unreasonably intrusive manner and that it breached principle 4. It was a permanent fixture and it overlooked the urinals. Even if the signage had indicated that there was a camera in the toilet area, it would not have made the camera justifiable because of the other circumstances of the filming.

The pub manager agreed to remove the camera in the toilet area.  This resolved the complaint, and we chose not to take the matter further.

September 2013

Collection of personal information – pub – camera in men’s toilet area – unfair and unreasonably intrusive in the circumstances – Privacy Act 1993; principle 4