20.09.2023

Proposed Privacy Act amendments – What you need to know about indirect personal data collection

A new Privacy Amendment Bill was recently introduced to Parliament.  The Bill proposes to insert a new Information Privacy Principle (IPP) 3A into the Privacy Act 2020, which would impose additional obligations on those who indirectly collect personal information about individuals. 

The key purpose of the change, according to the explanatory note in the Bill, is “to improve transparency for individuals about the collection of their personal information and better enable individuals to exercise their privacy rights”. 

Privacy legislation refers to those who collect personal information about individuals as “agencies” and we use that terminology in this article. 

What changes are proposed?

Privacy legislation (in particular the existing IPP 3) already obliges agencies who collect personal information directly from an individual to notify certain things to that individual.  The proposed IPP 3A would extend this requirement so that agencies which collect personal information indirectly would also be subject to similar obligations. 

The new IPP 3A would apply to:

  • all agencies (including natural persons and public and private organisations) which collect personal information about an individual from sources other than directly from the individual concerned,
  • but only in respect of personal information collected on and after 1 June 2025 (i.e. it would not apply retrospectively).

An agency to which the proposed IPP 3A applies will need to ensure that the individual about whom information is collected is made aware of:

  • the fact that the information has been collected;
  • the purpose for which the information has been collected;
  • the intended recipients of the information;
  • the name and address of the agency that has collected the information and any agency holding the information;
  • if the collection of the information is authorised or required by or under law, the particular law under which the collection of the information is authorised or required; and
  • the individual’s right to access and correct information.

What exceptions are available? 

There are a number of exceptions available which permit non-compliance with IPP 3A.  Most importantly, an agency does not need to take the above steps if the individual concerned has previously been made aware of the matters noted above.  For example, the exception may apply if an agency indirectly collects information about an individual from a third party, and that third party has previously notified the individual (in an adequate manner) that his or her information will be disclosed to the agency and also as to the matters noted above. 

There are also some further exceptions, some of which are similar to those that apply in respect to IPP 3, and some which are additional grounds available for IPP 3A only.  For example, an agency does not need to comply with IPP 3A if the agency believes on reasonable grounds that: 

  • the information being collected indirectly is publicly available;
  • compliance would reveal a trade secret; or
  • informing the individual concerned of the matters specified in IPP 3A would cause a serious threat to public health or safety, or to the health or safety of another individual.

What does this mean for you?

If the Bill is passed into law, agencies will need to consider their information collection processes.  This could include considering what steps can be taken to make individuals aware that their personal information is being collected indirectly.  If information is collected through an intermediary, a key question will be does the individual concerned know? 

The proposed changes may also lead agencies to review their contractual arrangements with such third parties to ensure privacy obligations are considered.  Privacy policies would need to be reviewed to ensure they clearly state what indirect sources are being used to collect personal information and to whom personal information will be disclosed.  

If you have any questions or wish to find out more information about these proposed changes, please contact our Business Advice Team or your usual contact at Hesketh Henry. 

 

Disclaimer:  The information contained in this article is current at the date of publishing and is of a general nature.  It should be used as a guide only and not as a substitute for obtaining legal advice.  Specific legal advice should be sought where required.

Do you need expert legal advice?
Contact the expert team at Hesketh Henry.
Kerry
Media contact - Kerry Browne
Please contact Kerry with any media enquiries and with any questions related to marketing or sponsorships on +64 9 375 8747 or via email.

Related Articles / Insights & Opinion

UK Supreme Court: Are collateral warranties considered construction contracts?
The UK Supreme Court recently released Abbey Healthcare (Mill Hill) Ltd v Augusta 2008 LLP (formerly Simply Construct (UK) LLP) [2024] UKSC 23 determining that a collateral warranty used in the constr...
17.09.2024 Posted in Construction & Disputes
shutterstock
Bowen case part 2 – the ins and outs of the determination
In our last article, we wrote about what protected disclosures are and who can make them. In this article, we discuss the Employment Relations Authority (Authority) determination, Bowen v Bank of New ...
13.09.2024 Posted in Employment
Are trustees bound to relationship property agreements?
In Rawson v Prescott [2024] NZHC 1919, the High Court addressed a dispute involving trust property and a relationship property agreement. Mr RR, trustee of the GR Family Trust, sought summary judgment...
10.09.2024 Posted in Private Wealth
shutterstock
Bowen case part 1 – blowing the whistle
You may have heard of the term ‘whistleblowing’, but have you heard of ‘protected disclosures’? Protected disclosures are a creature of the Protected Disclosures (Protection of Whistleblowers)...
10.09.2024 Posted in Employment
Construction theme black and white
Contractors take note – are any of your retentions clauses prohibited provisions?
In Stevensons Structural Engineers 1978 Ltd (in liq) v McMillan & Lockwood (PN) Ltd & Anor [2024] NZHC 2415, the High Court held that the timing for payment out of retentions in certain subcon...
05.09.2024 Posted in Construction
Avoiding the Grey Area: Interpreting Trust Beneficiary Classes
Beneficiary classes in trust deeds should be clearly defined to ensure the assets of the trust benefit the people who the settlor(s) of the trust originally intended.   If they are not, then disputes...
05.09.2024 Posted in Private Wealth
vecteezy square wooden blocks lined up on a wooden workbench  Insurance Icons centered
Hesketh Henry’s Insurance Team author LexisNexis Practical Guidance Insurance
Hesketh Henry’s Insurance Team is delighted to celebrate the launch of Practical Guidance Insurance. LexisNexis has launched Practical Guidance Insurance containing 12 topics and over 50 sub-topics ...
03.09.2024 Posted in Insurance
SEND AN ENQUIRY
Send us an enquiry

For expert legal advice, please complete the form below or call us on (09) 375 8700.