Law- Australian Legal System - Assessment Answer

Law Assignment

Assignment Task

1)Has Basil breached s 5 of the Surveillance Devices Act 1998 (WA) (“the Act”) by recording his wife’s conversation with Amber?

2) Explain whether you think a TV station would be likely to succeed in obtaining an order under s 31 of the Act to permit them to broadcast the conversation between Connie and Amber. Would your answer be different if Connie had not resigned?

3) Has Connie breached s 6 of the Act in filming the secretary? Has the TV station breached s 9 of the Act in broadcasting the footage of the secretary?

Question-1:

In the case, it is found out that Basil breached the section 5 of the Surveillance Devices Act 1998 of the Western Australia. In the case, it can be found that Basil has arranged with Amber that she will call Connie on the particular day. Amber calls Connie on her mobile phone and Connie took the call in the staff courtyard when Basil turned on the video camera installed there. The phone call has also been recorded in the device installed in Connie’s phone which was retrieved by Basil which shows that Connie admits that he had an affair with the opposition leader. As per the section 5 of the Surveillance Devices Act 1998 of the Western Australia, a person should not maintain or install any type of listening device in order to listen or monitor the private conversation where the person is not directly involved in the private communication. There are some exceptions present too for the act. In case any warrant has been issued under Part 4 of the act, the installation of the device can be done. The exception also states that in case of any emergency authorization, the listening devices can be installed. The law of Commonwealth also states that if the use of listening device is installed and the unintentional hearing occurs then the law will not be applicable. In this case, none of these exceptions have been occurred and as per the law, Basil breached the section 5 of the Surveillance Devices Act 1998 (WA) by recording the conversation of her wife with Amber. So, as per law, Basil might need to pay a penalty of $5000 or imprisonment of up to 12 months or both.

Question-2:

According to the section 31 of the Surveillance Devices Act 1998 of the Western Australia, a judge can order a person to publish any private communication in mass media which has come to the knowledge of the person as a indirect or direct use of listening device or a surveillance device as per the division 2 or 3 based on application to the court as per the section 32 of the Surveillance Devices Act 1998 of the Western Australia. While making any order, the judge of the court can impose the conditions such as restrictions in case of some necessary circumstances. So, in this case, it is evident that Basil has taken legal advice and they need to go to the court to take the order to publish the audio tape of Connie. The answer would not have been different if Connie had not resigned because it would not make any difference whether Connie resigned or not, she has come to know about the audio tape and now, Basil can take the permission of court to publish the audio tape.

Question-3:

Basil retrieved the video footage of Connie’s secretary smoking marijuana and gives it to Connie. When Connie threatened him to fire him from the job he told Connie that she did wrong by filming her activity as per law and she will report it to the friends of him working in press. But, Amber’s show broadcasted the footage of the secretary in a show called ‘drugs in the workplace’. According to the section 6 of the Surveillance Devices Act 1998 of the Western Australia a person cannot install, use or maintain any type of surveillance devices to record visually or witness any private activity to which the person is not a part. There are some exceptions present in the law which should be analyzed in this case. The act does not apply to the case in which a principal party provides consent to record the private activity of the other party and in case when the installation or the maintenance is carried out in the course where the duty of the person is a law enforcement officer or the maintenance or installation of the device is carried out by that person as ordered by the law enforcement officer for the investigation of any suspected criminal activity. As per the Western Australian laws, it is a criminal activity to smoke marijuana in workplace and in this case, Connie ordered Basil to record the activity of her secretary in order to protect the interest of Connie. As per the order of Connie, Basil recorded the video. So, in this case, the secretary cannot take any legal step against Connie for recording the video.

As per the section 9 of the Surveillance Devices Act 1998 of the Western Australia, a person does not have any right to knowingly publish or communicate any private conversation or the report of the conversation which has come to the knowledge of the person indirectly or directly through the use of listening device and in such case the penalty can be of up to $5000 and imprisonment of up to 12 months. But, in this case, the show in which the footage has been published is aimed for public interest and betterment of society, the secretary of Connie cannot take any legal action against her for publishing the footage on television based on the exception of the section 9 of the Surveillance Devices Act 1998.

This Law assignment sample was powered by the assignment writing experts of My Assignment Services AU. You can free download this Law assessment answer for reference. This solved Law assignment sample is only for reference purpose and not to be submitted to your university. For a fresh solution to this question, fill the form here and get our professional assignment help.