A client of the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation (ACC) approached a newspaper reporter alleging that ACC had mishandled her case. She provided the reporter with a report of a review conducted by ACC, together with a substantial amount of material she had obtained from ACC's files.

ACC was then asked by the reporter to answer a list of questions about the client's allegations. Some of the questions related to her entitlement to various allowances. It sought the client's agreement to respond to her allegations by using the information in its possession. ACC said that it would release details of financial payments, if necessary. The reporter did not have this information and the client refused to agree to the disclosure.

ACC responded to the reporter's questions, generally confining itself to the material given to the reporter by the client. This information was not 'disclosed' in terms of the Code as it had already been given to the reporter.

Comments were also made on four allegations.

- She had received an inadequate level of support and been denied the basics of life. ACC supplied details of actual levels of support provided to her and the total paid out.
- Her financial problems were caused by the failings of an ACC employee. ACC supplied details of financial problems which pre-dated her claim.
- She had been denied a wheelchair. ACC explained that she had burnt her existing wheelchair and that it took some time to arrange a suitable replacement. (The client subsequently explained she had done this in a fit of anger.)
- Her present accommodation was inappropriate. ACC outlined the steps taken to remedy the situation.

The client complained to me about ACC's disclosure of her personal details to the news media.

OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT

ACC submitted that the reporter's request had been made under the Official Information Act. Section 9(2)(a) of that Act allows a request to be refused if withholding the information is necessary to protect the privacy of a person. Section 9(1) provides a good reason for withholding may nevertheless be outweighed by public interest considerations which make the release of the information desirable.

ACC argued that as it had a duty to maintain public confidence in the accident compensation scheme, it would have been remiss to allow an inaccurate representation of the client's situation to go unchallenged as it might undermine public confidence in the scheme's ability to provide adequately for those suffering significant disabilities.

Section 7 Privacy Act provides that information privacy principle 11 and rule 11 Health Information Privacy Code (the Code) do not derogate from any provision in an Act which requires or authorises personal information to be made available. The Official Information Act authorises information to be made available in certain circumstances. ACC is subject to the Official Information Act and if it releases information in good faith in response to a request, s 7 will apply and the disclosure will be saved from the effect of rule 11. There can be no breach of rule 11 or principle 11 in such circumstances.

ACC released the total figure paid out to the client in the allowances to which she was entitled. I was satisfied in the circumstances that this information was released in good faith under the Official Information Act.

However other information was not made available under the Official Information Act as it was not existing information held by ACC. It was asked to put its case in response to the allegations. This effectively created new information, rather than releasing information ACC already held. I formed the opinion that the Official Information Act did not apply to this disclosure and that it was subject to rule 11 of the Code.

HEALTH INFORMATION PRIVACY CODE

Rule 11 allows disclosure by a health agency such as ACC in certain circumstances where it is not practicable nor desirable to obtain an authorisation from the individual concerned. Rule 11(2)(i) allows information to be disclosed if non-compliance (with rule 11) is necessary 'to avoid prejudice to the maintenance of the law'.

ACC had approached the client for an authorisation, which was refused. Therefore, it had reasonable grounds to believe it was not practicable to obtain an authorisation to the disclosure.

ACC submitted that non-compliance was necessary in the circumstances of this case because of the need to counter incorrect information in public circulation. Without correction, it believed the accident compensation scheme could be undermined to the extent that its ability to maintain the law under the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act could be prejudiced.

I did not consider that maintenance of the law extended to upholding the standing or credibility of a particular enactment or statutory body. In the absence of any other applicable exception, I formed the opinion that ACC had breached rule 11 by disclosing information to the reporter. The actions subject to my opinion were:

- client's claim in response to the allegation that her financial problems were caused by the failings of an ACC employee.
- Explaining that the client had burnt her existing wheelchair and that it took some time to arrange a suitable replacement in response to the client's claim that she had been denied a wheelchair.
- Disclosing the steps taken to alter the client's accommodation in response to her claim that her accommodation was inappropriate.

INTERFERENCE WITH PRIVACY

Besides breaching rule 11, the action must, in my opinion ->>
1. Have caused loss, detriment, damage, or injury to the client, or may do so;  or
2. Have adversely affected the rights, benefits, privileges, obligations, or interests of the client, or may do so; or
3. Have resulted in significant humiliation, significant loss of dignity, or significant injury to the client's feelings, or may do so.

Indexing terms: Disclosure of information to the news media by ACC - response to information disclosed by client - harm resulting from disclosure - Official Information Act, s 9 - Privacy Act, s 7 - Privacy Act, s 66 - Health Information Privacy Code, rule 11(2)(i)