Bunnings is taking on the Australian Privacy Commissioner in a legal showdown over claims it unlawfully used facial recognition technology across dozens of its hardware stores.

The Wesfarmers-owned retailer is defending its use of biometric surveillance between 2018 and 2021 at 63 stores in Victoria and New South Wales, arguing the technology was introduced to combat organised retail crime and protect staff from violent assaults.

Barrister Ruth Higgins SC told the Administrative Appeals Tribunal that Bunnings stores face “extraordinary” safety challenges, selling items like axes, knives and drills, and dealing with theft and aggression on a near-daily basis.

She said facial recognition was trialled only after other alert systems proved “unsatisfactory and ineffective”.

Evidence presented to the tribunal included testimony from a former police officer who oversaw Bunnings’ national investigations and security operations.

He found facial recognition significantly reduced theft and improved safety, with one store manager reporting a “dramatic” drop in threatening behaviour and an increased sense of security among young staff.

But Privacy Commissioner Carly Kind contends that Bunnings’ actions breached federal privacy laws by collecting “sensitive” biometric data without explicit customer consent.

Kind’s counsel, Michael Borsky KC, told the tribunal that no other Australian retailer was using facial recognition when Bunnings deployed it in 2018 – a time when such technology was largely limited to law enforcement and stadium security.

Bunnings previously partnered with Victoria Police on a facial recognition trial later ruled to have breached privacy laws.

Borsky argued that privacy laws allow the collection of sensitive information only when it is “essential and proportionate” to a business’s function, and only in exceptional circumstances.

He said Bunnings had other, less intrusive options available and that data showed theft was already declining when the technology was rolled out.

Bunnings maintains that it did not technically “collect” biometric data but instead converted CCTV footage into mathematical templates used for matching faces against a list of known offenders – a distinction it claims keeps it within the bounds of the Privacy Act.

Bunnings has since suspended its use of facial recognition technology. The tribunal hearing continues.

This follows revelations last year that Bunnings partnered with Victoria Police during a trial of its facial recognition system, which compared customers’ faces against a database of fewer than 500 banned individuals. It was later found by the Privacy Commissioner to have breached privacy laws.