Nicholas Commins

From today, individuals can seek redress for privacy harms in court.   The statutory tort for serious invasions of privacy is one of the changes made to the Privacy Act late last year to enhance Australians’ privacy rights.   Individuals can now bring a legal claim against another person or organisation who has invaded their privacy by intruding upon their seclusion or misused information relating to them. There are some exemptions and defences.   Time limits apply, and the court will be able to award damages or other remedies if appropriate.   Privacy Commissioner Carly Kind welcomes the change, “although the OAIC does not have a direct role in administering the tort, I’m delighted to see an alternative pathway for people to seek redress – it uplifts privacy rights for everyone”   Yet more still needs to be done, “last year’s reforms were the first step, we are looking forward to further reforms to make our privacy law fit for the digital age.” #privacy #privacyreforms  

256

13 Comments

The NSW Supreme Court’s Practice Note on the use of generative artificial intelligence is now in effect. This guidance arrives at a crucial time, following a recent case where a lawyer was referred to the NSW Legal Services Commissioner after submitting court documents containing AI-generated, non-existent case citations. In this video, BN’s Will Stidston breaks down the key takeaways from the new Practice Note, including what’s permitted, what’s prohibited, and the steps lawyers must take to ensure accuracy and confidentiality when using AI in legal proceedings.

67

1 Comment

A significant milestone for privacy law in Australia is reached, as the new statutory tort for serious invasions of privacy has now come into force. This development creates a legal avenue for individuals to take action if they believe their privacy has been breached, whether through intrusion into their private affairs or the misuse of personal information. This change marks a significant shift in privacy rights and obligations. If your organisation handles personal data, now is the time to review your practices and ensure compliance. Access our overview of what the latest update entails and what to expect next: https://lnkd.in/gRi8xwkX Authors: Patrick Considine, Paul Kallenbach, Dean Levitan, Tess McGuire, Tom Fletcher

95

A $5.8 million privacy penalty – and that’s just the beginning.   In a landmark decision, the Federal Court has handed down the first civil penalty under the Privacy Act, setting the tone for a new era of privacy enforcement in Australia.   Eden Winokur, Alison Baker, Iona Goodwin and Brigitte Gasson break down what this means for Australian businesses, including the risk of penalties per impacted individual and why a cyber incident could now carry billion-dollar consequences. Read the full insight: https://lnkd.in/ePfXTRhq

54

Can AI really capture the nuance of a boardroom discussion? Governance Institute of Australia and Australian Institute of Company Directors have released a joint statement on best-practice board minute-taking, including updated legal guidance and practical insights. The statement covers key principles for effective minutes, the evolving legal landscape, and how AI tools are starting to influence the process. It outlines the risks of relying too heavily on AI, while reinforcing the importance of human judgment, accuracy, and clarity in capturing board decisions. Read the full statement: https://bit.ly/4dwJjqx #Governance #BoardMinutes #AI #CorporateGovernance #AICD #GovernanceInstitute

81

2 Comments

Privacy misconceptions are everywhere. From boardrooms to bars, myths about what the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (Privacy Act) and its Australian Privacy Principles (APPs) requires and obliges continue to flourish. These myths persist because privacy law is complex and ever-evolving, and perhaps because, at first glance, some rules seem counter-intuitive. For Australian businesses, government legal practitioners, privacy officers, lawyers, and compliance professionals, believing a myth can lead to risky compliance gaps. It’s important to bust these myths so that your organisation or agency handles personal information correctly and confidently. Below, Kristina, Jim, Amanda and Lily tackle ten common Australian privacy myths, explaining the reality behind each one. Our accompanying article offers practical tips for compliance: https://lnkd.in/gTuy4Rg6

37

2 Comments

The Federal Court has confirmed Australian Clinical Labs must pay a $5.8m penalty along with $400,000 in legal costs to settle proceedings commenced by the OAIC regarding its 2022 data breach. The penalty comes as a pertinent reminder that the regulator is taking an increasingly active approach to enforcing compliance with the Privacy Act, and of the need to ensure your business is ready to handle cybersecurity incidents. In this article, Dudley Kneller, Raisa Blanco, Chris Girardi and Tilly Dalton step through key takeaways for businesses – particularly given the recently expanded penalty and investigatory powers regime under the Privacy Act. Read more: https://lnkd.in/gMHg4AEm If you found this insight article useful and you would like to subscribe to Gadens' updates, click here: https://lnkd.in/gwqNGne #auslaw

30

⛑️ The introduction of new information #privacy principle 3A into the NZ Privacy Act (the amendment Bill is now at third reading stage) will require a significant amount of work for some indirect data collectors and their data suppliers, unless they can come within the (fairly wide) exceptions. We're already working with a number of clients and it is not as easy as one might think to sort out who does what, particularly where there are multi stage data supply chains involved. 💡 IPP3A is the one that will require indirect collectors of personal information to tell the person whose information they have collected that the indirect collector has their PI, why they collected it and what they are going to do with it (among other things). ✅ It's good to see that the Minister has recognised that it may not be an easy task to adapt business processes, renegotiate data supply arrangements and update privacy policies etc, and has therefore proposed that IPP3A will not come into effect until 🚨1 May 2026 🚨 (as opposed to the 1 June 2025 date in the original Bill). ℹ️ You can find more information on the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, New Zealand's site https://lnkd.in/gkPwFb4t

49

1 Comment

Recent headlines and court decisions are sending a clear message to the legal industry: When it comes to AI, validation is non-negotiable for defensible outcomes. At Law In Order Pty Ltd, our team has invested significant time and expertise into perfecting this balance. As AI continues to reshape legal workflows, we’ve spent months testing, refining, and delivering hybrid document review solutions that combine advanced technology with the deep legal insight of our Managed Document Review team. In our latest article, we share three proven workflows designed to support litigation, investigations, and regulatory matters: 1. Validated extraction for early case insight 2. Prioritised review to reduce volume without compromising quality 3. AI-assisted review with expert oversight for consistent, reliable outcomes Click here to learn more: https://lnkd.in/efpKZrQJ #LegalTech #DocumentReview #AIinLaw #eDiscovery #LawInOrder #ManagedReview #LegalInnovation #HybridWorkflows #DefensibleReview

21

⚖️ JOINT SUBMISSION: Using AI Tools to Increase Access to Justice 👩🏼‍⚖️ The Victorian Law Reform Commission is conducting an inquiry to inform recommendations for law reform to guide the safe use of AI in Victorian Courts and Tribunals. ⚙️ At Justice Connect, we recognise the opportunities AI has to make the experience of getting and giving legal help easier. In our joint submission with the Federation of Community Legal Centres, we make recommendations for safe implementation of AI in the Victorian legal system, including: 📃 Ethical guidelines for AI use 🧠 Incorporating human oversight in AI-driven decision making 🔢 Implementing data protection measures in line with privacy laws 🔍 Regular monitoring and evaluation of AI systems 👥 Resourcing Victorian courts, tribunals, and legal services to develop and use AI tools Read the full submission 👉🏼 https://lnkd.in/gmuhFBic

33

1 Comment

We have advised Australian cloud backup provider Dropsuite on its acquisition by Texas-based tech company NinjaOne.   The team was led by partner Clayton James, with support from senior associates Mia Beagley and Jayne Walker, and solicitor Emma Kuhl.   Clayton James said, “It was fantastic to work with the Dropsuite team on this important cross-border transaction. We look forward to seeing Dropsuite’s offering expand as it integrates with NinjaOne.”   Learn more: https://lnkd.in/gE47PVpp

37

Partner Helen Clarke and Special Counsel Phillip Magness discuss the cyber risks that we see affecting Australian business, including ransomware and data extortion attacks, email attacks and state-sponsored attacks. They also outline what businesses need to do to protect their data and mitigate the impact of a critical cyber incident, and the work our Cyber, Privacy & Data Protection team is doing to assist clients with this mission. #cybersecurity #ransomware #dataextortion #cyberrisk

45

Today, we are excited to launch the LIV Benchmarking the Costs and Challenges of Running a Legal Practice in Victoria in 2025 report. This comprehensive analysis uncovers the escalating costs and operational challenges with which small to medium legal practices are grappling. The report provides valuable data and practical insights. Use it to compare your firm's expenses against similar sized practices and identify opportunities to improve operational efficiency. LIV members can log in to download their complimentary copy today. Not a member yet? Join us to gain access to this vital information. 🔗 Link to the full report in the comments 👇 #LegalPractice #LIV #BenchmarkingReport

40

4 Comments

What AI means for lawyers is a hot topic across the legal industry.  Senior Associate Hannah Fas shares her thoughts with the The Australian Financial Review and is optimistic about its potential. " … it’s certainly not a threat, or I don’t think it should be seen as a threat to legal roles, but more of an enhancement to what we do," Hannah says. https://lnkd.in/gPkAb4eP (paywall) #AI #artificialintelligence #lawyers Hayden Delaney, Steven Hunwicks📶, Briar Francis, Kerry Awerbuch, Andrew Chalet, Katrina Chambers, Tony Conaghan, Ben Coogan, Demetrios Christou, Mark Feetham, Bronwyn Furse, Peter Le Guay, Josh Simons, Angela Summersby, Mathew Baldwin

46

2 Comments

𝐀𝐔𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐀𝐍 𝐂𝐘𝐁𝐄𝐑 & 𝐏𝐑𝐈𝐕𝐀𝐂𝐘 𝐋𝐀𝐖 𝐀𝐋𝐄𝐑𝐓: 𝐇𝐚𝐧𝐝 ‘𝐞𝐦 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫: 𝐅𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐫 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐜𝐲𝐛𝐞𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐬 The Federal Court has released its full reasons in McClure v Medibank, continuing a tough line on legal professional privilege for cyber incident reports. Medibank joins Optus on the canvas, with privilege rejected for multiple reports created after its 2022 cyberattack. This is now essential reading for every GC, Board and cyber incident responder. WHAT WERE THE REPORTS? The applicants sought access to a suite of cyber reports and communications. Key among them: Three Deloitte reports: 🔹️Post-Incident Review (PIR) 🔹️Root Cause Analysis (RCA) 🔹️CPS 234 compliance report Other communications: 🔺️CrowdStrike investigation reports 🔺️Threat Intelligence digital forensic reports 🔺️Internal and external crisis comms and ransom response materials All were commissioned amidst regulatory scrutiny, public statements, and an anticipated class action. WHAT DID THE COURT FIND? ⭐️The Court found that privilege existed in certain third party comms and the two external cyber reports, but did not apply to the Deloitte reports, despite carefully worded engagement letters and "dominant purpose" claims. ⭐️Why? Because the evidence showed multiple purposes — including operational learnings, regulator engagement (APRA), stakeholder transparency, and reputational management. ⭐️Public statements (e.g. announcing a review “to ensure we learn from this event” and promising to “share key outcomes”) were inconsistent with maintaining confidentiality — raising implied waiver. ⭐️The Court stressed that it is not enough to say a report is for legal advice — the actual facts and conduct matter. WHAT ARE THE KEY TAKEAWAYS? 1️⃣ Multi-purpose = high risk: If reports serve both legal and non-legal purposes, they may fail the dominant purpose test. 2️⃣ Public statements can pierce privilege: Committing to transparency may waive rights you didn’t intend to. 3️⃣ Evidence over labels: It’s not about calling it “privileged” — it’s about proving why it was truly for legal advice. 4️⃣ Strategy matters: Privilege needs to be embedded into the comms, commissioning, and governance of cyber response from day one. An appeal is pending so the privilege wars continue. But so far, plaintiff law firms are undefeated. #CyberLaw #LegalPrivilege #IncidentResponse #DataBreach #Governance #CyberSecurity #FederalCourt #Privacy #InHouseCounsel

77

7 Comments

Could machines deliver fair sentencing in the courtroom of 2035? That was the question explored by innovative Australian law firm Lander & Rogers during an opening-day session at SXSW Sydney. Judge Nell Skinner, Oxford-trained ethicist Dr. Peter Collins, and Lander & Rogers partner Matthew McMillan debated an AI sentencing decision, sparking lively discussion on the balance between technology and human judgement. When asked if it was ethically acceptable to delegate life-impacting decisions to machines and whether AI could make more consistent and less biased decisions than humans, Dr Collins said: "As an example, I would use AI, if I were a doctor, to improve clinical care. But I would always leave the decision making to the doctor and the nurses. We do it [use AI] in education, we do it in all sorts of fields. It's not exceptional. I think the thing that AI is brilliant at is sweeping up data." "Ultimately, AI is actually more ethical than human beings because it's not necessarily swayed by bias. The limitation of our decision making is the limitation of our cognitive function. We're hardwired for stereotypes." #LegalTechTalk #LegalTech #LegalAI #Legal #AI

46

1 Comment