Australian Privacy Commissioner takes expansive view of jurisdiction in Ashley Madison case

Published On 31/08/2016 | By Peta Stevenson | Consumer protection, Enforcement

Over on our sister Blog, IP Whiteboard, partner Patrick Gunning has analysed the recent decision of the Australian Privacy Commissioner in the Ashley Madison case.

Patrick considers the differing approach of the Commissioner, in assessing whether the Australian Privacy Principles apply (and were therefore breached when the Ashley Madison service was hacked and details released by hackers The Impact Group) to the jurisdictional concept of “carrying on business in Australia” in comparison to recent analysis of the same concept in the context of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) and Competition and Consumer Act.

You may recall Patrick from such posts as “Steam to vent” and “All steamed up about consumer guarantees” – he has form in analysing this question in the context of the ACCC’s prosecution of software company Valve for breaches of consumer guarantees.  In March 2016, the Federal Court found that Valve did carry on business in Australia, reinforcing that foreign businesses selling goods or services to Australian consumers can be subject to the ACL and the jurisdiction of Australian courts.

Read Patrick’s analysis in detail here.



About The Author

is a partner in the Sydney office of King & Wood Mallesons where she specialises in competition litigation with experience in a wide range of jurisdictions. Peta also advises clients on the application of the anti-competitive conduct, consumer protection and access provisions of the Competition & Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) and related state legislation. In 2001/02 she undertook her LLM at the University of Cambridge, during which time she developed a passionate if fleeting interest in rowing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

5 × one =