Clarity where law,
information and technology meet.

Potentially, but the Biometric Processing Privacy Code 2025 now applies. Before collecting or using biometric information, an organisation generally needs to establish a lawful purpose, test whether the processing is necessary and proportionate, consider less intrusive alternatives, provide the required notice and put appropriate safeguards in place. The answer depends on the proposed technology, purpose, setting and effect on people.

A workable framework should define what counts as AI, assign ownership, tier uses by risk, require proportionate assessment before deployment and establish monitoring, escalation and retirement processes. It should also address staff use of general purpose tools, procurement, data handling, output checking, record keeping and incident response.

New Zealand law does not impose a general PIA requirement for every project, but the Privacy Commissioner expects organisations to use PIAs for new or higher risk information practices. Biometrics, AI, profiling, sensitive information, major data sharing and new overseas arrangements are common triggers. Some specific regimes, including the Biometric Processing Privacy Code, impose more particular assessment obligations.

The practice covers both commercial IP and strategy or enforcement. That includes ownership and chain of title reviews, copyright and trade mark advice, licensing, assignments, development and collaboration agreements, commercialisation, brand protection strategy, infringement analysis, cease and desist correspondence, negotiated resolutions and litigation strategy with specialist counsel where needed.

Yes. O’Brien Legal advises on complex contractual disputes, including substantial construction claims, as well as breach of confidence, privacy, data, technology, intellectual property, defamation and reputation matters. Rachel also advises on privacy issues arising within employment and relationship property disputes. The work can include case strategy, evidence preservation, urgent correspondence, negotiations, settlement and working with specialist barristers when court proceedings or urgent relief are required.

Yes. Where appropriate, O’Brien Legal uses carefully selected AI and modern legal technology to support research, document analysis, drafting and efficient delivery. Technology supports the work. Rachel remains responsible for the legal analysis and advice, with confidentiality, privacy and professional obligations kept at the centre of each matter.