Sunday Star-Times

Protecting confidenti­al informatio­n paramount

- Dan Moore

NEW ZEALAND has traditiona­lly had a good track record of keeping things confidenti­al, and at transparen­cy.org, overall, the country’s business ethics rate 91⁄

2 out of 10 in the corruption scale.

As we progress further into the digital age, however, we are seeing reports of breaches of privacy and confidenti­ality more often.

Recently, Work and Income, Immigratio­n New Zealand, ACC and Novopay have been in the news for the wrong reasons, inadverten­tly releasing people’s sensitive informatio­n to others.

The Privacy Act 1993 protects personal informatio­n. The act has several principles which cover the collection, storage, use, distributi­on, transfer and protection of a person’s personal informatio­n that is collected by public or private organisati­ons.

Failure to comply with the principles can result in fines and damages being awarded against the organisati­on that is in breach.

The act, however, doesn’t extend to company informatio­n in the hands of another. As such, when entering into arrangemen­ts with other parties, most companies require a confidenti­ality clause in their agreement or contract.

This prevents either party from disclosing the other’s confidenti­al informatio­n. There is no act that the company is relying on, but rather contract law.

If both parties have agreed to the confidenti­ality clause, its terms can be enforced.

Once the clause has been included in the contract, if you are receiving confidenti­al informatio­n, it’s up to you to put reasonable and adequate protection in place to ensure this informatio­n is protected.

This could be storing physical copies of documents within a locked filing cabinet or, if electronic­ally held, using a protected device or network, where only authorised people have access.

Access needs to be restricted to those who have a need to know the informatio­n and are allowed, by the terms of the contract, to know the informatio­n.

Confidenti­ality agreements can also be used when at the initial discussion phase of a relationsh­ip, before any formal contract is in place.

In terms of protection within an organisati­on, it’s useful to have in place proper confidenti­ality protection­s with staff.

These could be a confidenti­ality clause in employment agreements and/or a robust privacy and informatio­n protection policy.

This will ensure that staff know what is expected of them when handling sensitive informatio­n and the processes that should be followed.

Informatio­n security audits are also useful to test how the protection is working.

So, if despite all this, the worst happens and you suspect that informatio­n you hold has been leaked, what do you need to do?

The first step is to determine what informatio­n has been leaked, to whom and how it has happened.

Patching the source of the leak should be the next priority, to prevent further informatio­n loss.

Then you need to consider what obligation­s are owed to whom, whether that be under the Privacy Act or under a confidenti­ality agreement or both.

If it’s in breach of the Privacy Act, notifying the Privacy Commission­er can be a good way to minimise the negative reaction, rather than waiting for a complaint to be made against you.

In terms of confidenti­ality agreements, the specific requiremen­ts will depend on what has been agreed between the parties.

Overall, if you are collecting or holding sensitive informatio­n, you will have obligation­s to collect and deal with it properly.

It is good practice to ensure that your obligation­s are being complied with and that your confidenti­al informatio­n is secure, so that you or your organisati­on do not end up in the headlines for the wrong reasons. Dan Moore is a partner in Hamilton law firm Norris Ward McKinnon. Informatio­n in Your law should not be a substitute for legal advice.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand