Open main menu Close main menu

Resources and publications

Ngā rauemi me ngā tānga

Search guidescase notesopinionsreports and other information. Resources and publications can also be searched by date and other options. 

Use the search bar to make your search. Then use the filters to narrow down the results by resource type or topic. 

More information about the resource categories on this page
Search by keyword
  • Request for information refused due to offensive and repetitive nature

    Case notes
    Number of requests made to Police over several years—recent request considered frivolous and vexatious—refused under s 18(h) in light of tone of correspondence and previous similar requests—requester had genuine interest in obtaining the requested information—requester agreed to withdraw the abusive remarks and redraft his requests purged of derogatory and intemperate comment
  • Request for reasons for mark awarded for university honours paper

    Case notes
    Request for reasons for mark awarded for university honours paper—refused on grounds information did not exist in documentary form and was not readily retrievable—obligation to provide statement under section 23—statement provided
  • Request for information relating to alleged violation of a hospital patient

    Case notes
    Request for information relating to alleged violation of a hospital patient—right to a fair trial—information withheld under s 6(c) pending outcome of legal proceedings—information released after proceedings concluded
  • Request for legal opinion used in making submissions on proposed regulatory changes

    Case notes
    Request for legal opinion—request refused under s 9(2)(h)—opinion used extensively in submissions—view formed that privilege waived—any need to withhold outweighed under s 9(1) by strong public interest consideration
  • Request for information relating to changes in Training Incentives Allowance

    Case notes
    Request for information relating to changes in Training Incentives Allowance—information withheld under ss 9(2)(f)(iv) and 9(2)(g)(i)—discussion of principles—good reason under section 9(2)(f)(iv) to withhold the advice on the options under consideration but not the options themselves
  • Request by non-custodial parent for children’s school reports

    Case notes
    Request by non-custodial father for school reports of two daughters—father accused of indecently assaulting daughters—father denied charges—information required for defence—s 9(2)(a) applicable, but public interest under s 9(1) in right to justice outweighed complete protection
  • Request for research data held by Crown Research Institute

    Case notes
    Research data subject to clear confidentiality assurances—some farmers would be reluctant to participate in similar trials if released—s 9(2)(ba)(i) applies
  • Request for list of all strategic goods exported from New Zealand

    Case notes
    Request for list of all strategic goods exported from New Zealand—some information provided but name of exporter and value before tax of strategic goods withheld—9(2)(ba)(i) applied—residual issue of public accountability resolved following inquiries under s 13(3) of the Ombudsmen Act 1975—MFAT agreed that in future, it would disclose in its annual report the statistics it had previously made available only on request
  • Request for papers presented to Government leading to decision to withdraw troops from Bosnia

    Case notes
    Request for papers presented to Government leading to decision to withdraw troops from Bosnia—extensive deletions made under ss 6(a) and 6(b)—some further information released following the investigation and review
  • Request for information about a victim of crime

    Case notes
    Request for information about victim of crime—information needed for petition to Governor-General—balance to be struck between privacy interest and public interest in justice
  • Request for minutes and any report of meeting of Reserve Bank Board of Directors

    Case notes
    Request for minutes and any report of meeting of Reserve Bank Board of Directors—Uncertainty and confusion could be created in the financial markets if private positions recorded on Bank files, which may not match the official position, were released—integral part of the development of monetary policy forecasts and judgments is the encouragement of vigorous internal debate—good reason to withhold under ss 9(2)(d) and 9(2)(g)(i)
  • Request for details of out-of-court settlements and costs

    Case notes
    Request for details of out-of-court settlements and costs—ss 9(2)(ba)(ii) and 9(2)(j) found to apply—no countervailing public interest
  • Request for statement of reasons for non-appointment to board

    Case notes
    Request for statement of reasons for non-reappointment to board—matter pursued by third party with consent—information refused under s 9(2)(a)—statement of reasons provided to person not reappointed
  • Request for capital cost of certain ECNZ power stations and their current book valuations

    Case notes
    Request for capital cost of certain ECNZ power stations and their current book valuations—refused under s 9(2)(i)—release of the information would prejudice ECNZ’s commercial activities—public interest met by availability of Government valuations and release of global or aggregated figures covering the information requested
  • Request for prison escort bus costs

    Case notes
    Tendering for prison escort buses was not a commercial activity—essential element of profit not present—information protected by s 9(2)(j) because costs could be used by successful tenderer to ‘negotiate-up’ rates during the negotiation stage of the tendering process
  • Request for names of ‘eminent New Zealanders’ consulted during preparation of Intelligence and Security Agencies Bill

    Case notes
    Request for names of ‘eminent New Zealanders’ who were part of the consultative process in preparing the Intelligence and Security Agencies Bill—request refused under s 9(2)(g)(i) —individuals consulted—in respect of those who advised that disclosure would inhibit them from giving free and frank advice to the Government in future, section 9(2)(g)(i) applied—need to withhold outweighed by countervailing public interest
  • Request for paper written by Minister at home

    Case notes
    Request for paper written by Minister of Revenue—request declined because not considered to be official information—when does private document become ‘official information’—good reason under s 9(2)(g)(i) to withhold the paper
  • Request for report prepared by External Assessments Bureau

    Case notes
    Request for reports on environmental damage resulting from French nuclear testing—good reason to refuse request under s 6(a) at time request refused—disclosure likely to prejudice the international relations of the Government of New Zealand
  • Request for details of out-of-court settlement of a personal grievance

    Case notes
    Request for terms of settlement and amount paid—out-of-court settlement—s 9(2)(ba)(ii) applied—no countervailing public interest
  • Department of Social Welfare provides incorrect information about Superannuation

    Case notes
    Department of Social Welfare provides incorrect information about Superannuation
  • Prison unnecessarily holds inmates in secure unit

    Case notes
    Placement of minimum secure inmates in maximum security conditions
  • School Boards should record reasons for decisions to suspend

    Case notes
    Suspension from school for marijuana smoking—school procedures provided for suspension for drug use—application of principles of High Court decision in M & R v Palmerston North Boys High School—need for transparency in decision-making—consideration of requirements of s.23 of the Official Information Act 1982
  • Earthquake Commission not required to cover buildings under construction in the event of a landslide

    Case notes
    Earthquake Commission and Insurer both decline cover for half-built structure on private property, damaged following a landslide—still being under construction meant the building was not being used for its intended purpose and EQC’s decision in this respect was correct—Ombudsman advised that the complainant could refer the matter back to the insurer for a reconsideration and the Insurer in this case took a liberal view of what had been an unusual event and settled the claim—case indicates the need to obtain cover for landslip while a building is under construction