Ask an Australia Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
I am needing clarification / confirmation of my understanding of the Invasion of Privacy ACT 1971 in Queensland for the following Sections and Sub Sections
Do not all of these apply to my situation. From my understanding they would and is in opposition to the answer you provided me with the other day.
INVASION OF PRIVACY ACT 1971 - SECT 4
4 Definitions listening device means any instrument, apparatus, equipment or device capable of being used to overhear, record, monitor or listen to a private conversation simultaneously with its taking place.
INVASION OF PRIVACY ACT 1971 - SECT 42
42 Reference to listening devices and private conversations (2) A reference in this part to a party to a private conversation is a reference--
(a) to a person by or to whom words are spoken in the course of a private conversation; and
(b) to a person who, with the consent, express or implied, of any of the persons by or to whom words are spoken in the course of a private conversation, overhears, records, monitors or listens to those words.
INVASION OF PRIVACY ACT 1971 - SECT 43
43 Prohibition on use of listening devices Subsection (2) (a) where the person using the listening device is a party to the private conversation; and
INVASION OF PRIVACY ACT 1971 - SECT 45
45 Prohibition on communication or publication of private conversations by parties thereto Subsection(2)(b),Subsection (2)(c)(iii) & Subsection (3)(c)&(d)
Please respond and confirm if my thinking is correct.
All sections below refer to the Invasion of privacy act 1971
Yes I am the person who made the recordings and as per section 42 (2) (a) & (b) I was a party to a private conversation as per subsection (2) (a) & (b) I am "of any persons by or to whom words are spoken in the course of a private conversation, overhears, records, monitors or listens to those words.
The recording device I used fits the definition in Section 4
As per section 43 (2) (a) the person using the listening device is a party of the private conversation. Again as per Section 42 (2) (a) & (b) above I am a party as per the definition.
As per section 45 (2) (c) (iii) and more so Section 45 (2) (e) recordings were made for the protection of the lawful interests of that person "me" which then ties into Section 45 (3) (c) & (d)
I hope this clarifies everything. The recordings were made as my employer was abusing their position of power "bullying in the workplace" and because they were issuing warning letters on me which were being served on me outside of company policy time frames. Also because I was threatened by senior management during the review process of the warning letters and because the company set up a situation which resulted in my constructive dismissal. These recordings can disprove the inaccuracies in their statements as the employer is denying that they constructed the dismissal.
Yes that's what I understand. BUT! the way that I read it I also understand that I would be able to take these to court or in this case FWA arbitration as evidence to support the actions and conduct of my employer against me over the last year as it goes to support the repeated and systematic approach they have used and shows a history of not treating me fairly either via policy or procedures and for the fact it demonstrates that management and HR were advised several times of my objections to the way they were treating me and that I had several times stated that their actions affected the work relationship between my direct and senior managers and that I had several times requested a witness or support person and that they denied me one.
So is it as I read it, true that these tapes will be able to be entered as eveidence to support my case that I was wrongfully dismissed via constructive dismissal?
Thanks Alex for your replies as I thought that this was the legislation that would apply to my set of circumstances, as I was wanting and needing some clarity so that I can respond to my employer advising them of the the existance of this evidence so they know I can reputiate their false comments and claims.
Last question relating to this. In going back to the employer now or more so their lawyer, when I tell them of the existance of these I can use qoutes from the recordings to demonstrate some of the content correct? As it is only then being shared with the other person/s involved in the conversations and not an uninvolved third party. The reason I ask is that so of the qoutes and statements will make the lawyers realize that what they have been told does not truely reflect the actual content of the discussions and what was truely said and by whom.
Of their existance at all or just actual content. Because my former employer is a big big multi national and now that they have agreed to an open hearing they will not want to have this sort of information that I have against them to become public record, so I would have thought that as per Section 45 (2) allows ithe conversation to be communicated or published when section 45 Subsection (2)(a) applies "is made to another party to the private conversation" parties being refered to by definition in Section 42(2)(a)
Section 45(2) says
Subsection (1) does not apply where the communication or publication -
(a) "is made to another party to the private conversation"
As their lawyer is instructed to act on their behalf then would not Section 45 (2) (d) apply
"is made to a person who has, or is believed, on reasonable grounds by the person making the communication or publication to have, such an interest in the private conversation as to make the communication or publication reasonable under the circumstances in which it is made"
Would this not make it possible for me to communicate it to the Lawyer through the FWA conciliator as this matter has already had a concilation hearing last Thursday.
By communicating the existance and or part of the content now to the respondants lawyer MAY! and I say MAY! allow a remedy or agreement to be made while still at a conciliation level before having to go to arbitration. Basically I asked for compensation but the respondent declined but that was without them having the knowledge that the recordings exist. Making their existance aware now could bring around a commercial settlement before arbitration is necessary.
So don't devulge content but ok to advise them of existance of recordings?
Thank you for your patience and advise.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).