About Us

We work collaboratively with our clients to build strong, sustainable relationships. Our team is committed to delivering consistent high standards of service, and we understand the importance of accessibility. Working with us, you'll enjoy open communication, meaning well scoped, properly resourced and effectively managed matters.

Learn More

Latest Case

Providing innovative procurement solutions for local government projects April 20, 2018

We advised City of Casey on the procurement process of the Bunjil Place Project. Bunjil Place is a $125 million civic and cultural precinct for the City of Casey, encompassing an 800-seat theatre and 200-seat … Continued

Latest News

Maddocks signs on for Luminance AI platform May 24, 2018

Thursday 24 May 2018 Maddocks has adopted an artificial intelligence (AI) platform to assist in streamlining due diligence processes. The firm has signed on to use the market-leading Luminance AI platform to provide due diligence … Continued

Latest Article

Strategic use of regulatory action policies: an example in the context of Freedom of Information May 23, 2018

Regulatory action policies (including strategies and statements issued by regulators) are a useful tool for regulators to signal the importance of a particular regulatory area to the regulated sector and to the public at large. … Continued

Serious invasions of privacy in the digital era – The Australian take

The current celebrity photo hacking scandal in the USA provides a timely reminder about the absence of privacy laws in Australia.

A large number of private photographs, including photographs depicting a number of female celebrities either naked or in a state of undress, have been stolen and published online. It has been reported that these photographs were stolen by a hacker who somehow gained access to the celebrities' cloud storage and computing accounts. A number of the celebrities have already made statements that this was a serious invasion of their privacy and they will be legally pursuing anyone who publishes these stolen images.

Currently if similar hacking occurred in Australia, the victim of the hack would not have a cause of action for breach of privacy. The person could attempt to bring a claim founded on another cause of action, however, historically these types of claims have been difficult to sustain.

In a case of perfect timing, the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) on Wednesday tabled in Parliament its final report on its investigations into 'Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era.' Fittingly, this report notes that invasions 'may occur with increasing ease and frequency in the digital era, when the mobile phones in our pockets are all potential surveillance devices, drones are becoming cheaper and more advanced, and personal information once put online seems impossible to destroy or forget.' A copy of the report can be found here.

The ALRC noted that it had not been asked to determine whether a statutory cause of action for serious invasion of privacy was needed or desirable. This was because three recent law reform inquiries in Australia have answered this question affirmatively. Rather, the ALRC was asked to design the cause of action.

If the Commonwealth Government enacted the cause of action recommended by the ALRC, this tort would provide protection where:

  • a person's privacy has been invaded either intentionally or recklessly
  • the invasion occurred either through intrusion upon the person's seclusion or misuse of the person's private information
  • the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy
  • the invasion was serious
  • the public interest in privacy outweighed any countervailing public interest.

Obviously, if such a tort were enacted and if a similar event happened in Australia, the person whose privacy was invaded would have a clear cause of action against the hacker. The person would be entitled to claim damages. More relevantly, the person may be able to obtain an injunction restraining the publication of the private material and an order that the material be delivered up and destroyed.  

The current celebrity hacking scandal provides the perfect example of why many are advocating that individuals should be able to sue for serious invasions of privacy.  However, care needs to be taken in the creation of such a cause of action to protect the legitimate rights of freedom of speech and expression.

If you would like to know more or would like to us to assist your business with these issues, please contact our Commercial Disputes team.

Author

Erin Hourigan | Senior Associate | 61 2 9291 6308 | erin.hourgian@maddocks.com.au
 

The current celebrity photo hacking scandal in the USA provides a timely reminder about the absence of privacy laws in Australia.

A large number of private photographs, including photographs depicting a number of female celebrities either naked or in a state of undress, have been stolen and published online. It has been reported that these photographs were stolen by a hacker who somehow gained access to the celebrities' cloud storage and computing accounts. A number of the celebrities have already made statements that this was a serious invasion of their privacy and they will be legally pursuing anyone who publishes these stolen images.

Currently if similar hacking occurred in Australia, the victim of the hack would not have a cause of action for breach of privacy. The person could attempt to bring a claim founded on another cause of action, however, historically these types of claims have been difficult to sustain.

In a case of perfect timing, the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) on Wednesday tabled in Parliament its final report on its investigations into 'Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era.' Fittingly, this report notes that invasions 'may occur with increasing ease and frequency in the digital era, when the mobile phones in our pockets are all potential surveillance devices, drones are becoming cheaper and more advanced, and personal information once put online seems impossible to destroy or forget.' A copy of the report can be found here.

The ALRC noted that it had not been asked to determine whether a statutory cause of action for serious invasion of privacy was needed or desirable. This was because three recent law reform inquiries in Australia have answered this question affirmatively. Rather, the ALRC was asked to design the cause of action.

If the Commonwealth Government enacted the cause of action recommended by the ALRC, this tort would provide protection where:

  • a person's privacy has been invaded either intentionally or recklessly
  • the invasion occurred either through intrusion upon the person's seclusion or misuse of the person's private information
  • the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy
  • the invasion was serious
  • the public interest in privacy outweighed any countervailing public interest.

Obviously, if such a tort were enacted and if a similar event happened in Australia, the person whose privacy was invaded would have a clear cause of action against the hacker. The person would be entitled to claim damages. More relevantly, the person may be able to obtain an injunction restraining the publication of the private material and an order that the material be delivered up and destroyed.  

The current celebrity hacking scandal provides the perfect example of why many are advocating that individuals should be able to sue for serious invasions of privacy.  However, care needs to be taken in the creation of such a cause of action to protect the legitimate rights of freedom of speech and expression.

If you would like to know more or would like to us to assist your business with these issues, please contact our Commercial Disputes team.

Author

Erin Hourigan | Senior Associate | 61 2 9291 6308 | erin.hourgian@maddocks.com.au