AML-CFT is a topic that continues to dominate the news headlines across the world. Penalties for non-compliance continue to escalate, the AML legal landscape constantly changes, and the need to comply...
Demystifying AI for the Legal Profession Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming the way we practice law, both in Australia and around the world. The Law Society of NSW has partnered with...
Introducing Protégé™ Legal AI Workflows What does legal AI look like in practice for Australian lawyers? In this episode, we explore how Protégé legal AI workflows...
Generative AI is rapidly reshaping legal practice across Australia. Our latest survey, from over 1000 legal professionals, explores how firms, chambers, in-house teams, government departments, and educators...
In this episode of Legal Talk, host Jennifer Bannan, Head of Strategic Partnerships at LexisNexis®, talks with Katy Fixter, Managing Director of LexisNexis APAC, to explore the next evolution of artificial...
Location data is so rich and revealing of patterns of movement and behaviour that it can oftentimes at least individuate, if not also lead to the identification of, individuals.
Any corporation that collects an individual’s location data may be wrestling with specific challenges to meeting its obligations defined under the Australian Privacy Act.
In fact, the Federal Court of Australia (FCA) recently held that Google partially misled Australian consumers about the collection of their location data when it made on-screen representations on Android mobile phones and tablets.
In this article, the following issues are explored, and recommendations are made which may be helpful for lawyers who are advising stakeholders regarding,
Source: Privacy Law Bulletin (2020, Vol 17, No 5)
Authored by Anna Johnston BA, LLB (Hons I), Grad Dip Leg Prac, Grad Cert Mgmt, MPP (Hons)Principal, Salinger Privacyanna@salingerprivacy.com.auwww.salingerprivacy.com.au
COMPLETE THE FORM TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE