Our website uses cookies so we can analyse our site usage and give you the best experience. Click "Accept" if you’re happy with this, or click "More" for information about cookies on our site, how to opt out, and how to disable cookies altogether.

We respect your Do Not Track preference.

In March 2002, a tertiary education institution published a booklet entitled Information for International Students that included a photograph of a man who was a visitor to the campus.

This man complained to me that he did not consent to his photograph being taken. He also objected to the publication of his image in the booklet for 'advertising purposes'.

The man considered that the institution's actions were in breach of information privacy principles 1, 2, 4 and 11 of the Privacy Act.

I advised the man that in order to be covered by the Privacy Act's provisions, and thereby fall within my jurisdiction, the institution must have collected or disclosed 'personal information' about him. Section 2 defines personal information as 'information about an identifiable individual'.

Part of the man's hair was visible in the photograph, as were his bare arms. However, his face was entirely obscured. Further, his clothes were not particularly distinctive. I considered that, to a casual observer of the photo, there was insufficient visual information to identify the man.

Without further information, a distinctive feature or a personal connection of some kind, it seemed implausible that the photograph could be seen to identify the man.

For these reasons, it was my opinion that the photograph did not contain personal information about the man because it did not contain 'information about an identifiable individual'. I considered that the institution did not collect or disclose personal information about the man. Accordingly, the actions were not covered by the Privacy Act's provisions.

I noted that, even if the man could be identified from the photograph, in this instance, its publication had not caused any adverse consequence to him. It was therefore unlikely that I would have found that the institution caused an interference with the man's privacy.

A positive outcome to the complaint was that the institution changed its policy. In future, it would ensure that the subjects of the photographs would be made aware when photographs are taken for publicity purposes.

June 2006

Indexing terms: Collection and disclosure of personal information - Tertiary education institution - Photograph of student published in a booklet - Whether the photograph contained “personal information” about the student - Privacy Act 1993, section 2