Resources and publications
Ngā rauemi me ngā tānga
Search guides, case notes, opinions, reports 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
Guides
Commonly used guides include:
- The OIA for Ministers and agencies
- The LGOIMA for local government agencies
- Making official information requests: a guide for requesters
Detailed guidance on the official information legislation and aspects of good administrative practice.
We also have guidance on disability rights and protected disclosures.
Case notes and opinions
Case notes are a short case summary, often demonstrating an aspect of a case.
An Ombudsman's Opinion is published where there is public interest in showing the full details of a case.
Reports
Reports include OPCAT, disability rights, official information practice and systemic investigation.
Outreach
Contains our media releases, newsletters, pamphlets, speeches and fact sheets. Fact sheets are published in multiple language and accessible formats.
Corporate documents
This includes our annual reports and strategic intentions.
Projects, reference and data
This includes our official information complaints data, updates on investigations and other projects, and submissions by the Ombudsman.
View all projects, reference and data
Template letters and work sheets
These template letters and work sheets can be used by agencies to help respond to official information requests.
52 Resources Show all
Request for information about death in custody
Case notesRequest for all correspondence about death in custody—unreasonable to rely on sections 9(2)(a) and 9(2)(ba)(i) without compiling and reviewing the information—subsequent reliance on section 18(f) (substantial collation or research) also unjustified—Request for staff names and initials in Commerce Commission memorandum
Case notesSection 9(2)(a) OIA did not apply—not necessary to withhold staff names to protect their privacy—section 9(2)(g)(ii) did not apply—no information to suggest release would lead to improper pressure or harassment—section 9(2)(g)(i) did not apply—no reasonRequest for names and contact details in Department of Corrections’ emails
Case notesSection 9(2)(a) OIA did not apply to names—many of the names were publicly available— seniority— section 9(2)(g)(ii) did not apply to names—no evidence to suggest release would lead to improper pressure or harassment—section 9(2)(a) did not apply to emaRequest for officials’ names in information about glyphosate
Case notesSection 9(2)(a) OIA did not apply—not necessary to withhold staff names to protect their privacy—section 9(2)(g)(ii) did not apply—no information to suggest release would lead to improper pressure or harassment—possibility of public criticism not enoughRequest for contact details of Housing New Zealand staff
Case notesSection 9(2)(g)(ii) OIA applied—there was a strong likelihood that staff would be subjected to further harassment or improper pressure if the requester obtained their contact details—this conduct could detrimentally affect staff thus impairing HNZ’s abiRequest for names of staff and contractors involved in producing crime and safety survey
Case notesSection 9(2)(g)(ii) OIA applied to staff names—on basis of past conduct Ombudsman satisfied that requester would engage in improper pressure or harassment that would impact on the Ministry’s ability to attract and retain staff and contactors—section 9(2Request for names and address for service of two Police officers
Case notesSection 9(2)(a) and 9(2)(g)(ii) OIA applied—past conduct suggested the requester would publish information targeting or encouraging others to target the officers in a way that would breach their personal privacy, and subject them to improper pressure orRequest for names of frontline forestry officers in information about the felling and milling of kauri
Case notesSection 9(2)(g)(ii) OIA applied—MPI provided evidence of past instances of harassment and comments from the staff concerned—reasonable expectation that release would lead to improper pressure or harassment which would be detrimental to MPI’s administratRequest for briefing notes relating to state visits
Case notesInspection on conditions in order to identify the documents required provided means of resolving s 18(f) refusalRequest for Policy Advisory Group briefings to Prime Minister about infant formula threat
Case notesSection 9(2)(f)(iv) applies to PAG briefings to Prime Minister subject to public interest test— relationship between PAG and the Prime Minister, in his or her constitutional role as leader of the Government, is unique—complete confidentiality in interactions with his or her closest advisers is required to support the Prime Minister in carrying out that roleRequest for information regarding rental housing warrants of fitness
Case notesSection 9(2)(f)(iv) provides good reason to withhold some documents—Cabinet decision making incomplete—publicity from release would impede the Cabinet and Minister from making balanced, efficient and effective decision—Minister had addressed public interest in participation and accountability through disclosure of bulk of information at issueRequest for information redacted from Ministerial briefings and Cabinet papers on telecommunications and ultra-fast broadband
Case notesWhile some decisions had been made, others were still required, and disclosure would prejudice the orderly and effective conduct of ongoing advisory and decision making processesRequest for advice to Local Government Commission
Case notesNo ministerial or executive government decision making process would be undermined by release—draft and final versions of the advice were substantially similar and the advice was in the nature of a careful and considered critique—no good reason to withholdNames of senior and principal historian involved in writing treaty settlement memo
Case notesSections 9(2)(a) and 9(2)(g)(ii) OIA did not apply—information publicly available—seniority—degree of responsibility—no material supporting likelihood of pressure or harassmentRequest for advice regarding proposals for the future of Christchurch education
Case notesDecision was not justified under s 9(2)(f)(iv) because Cabinet had already made high level decisions and the key elements of the plan had been announced—strong public interest in releaseRequest for Cabinet paper on decision to retain newborn blood spot cards
Case notesDecisions had been made—information did not reveal advice that would subsequently be tendered—s 9(2)(f)(iv) does not applyRequest for report on application to enter negotiations to integrate school
Case notesWhile the report itself had been considered, it was part of a longer term process of advice—disclosure would prejudice the orderly and effective conduct of ongoing advisory and decision making processesRequest for Cabinet paper relating to review of Overseas Investment Act
Case notesDisclosure would prejudice orderly and effective conduct of ongoing advisory and decision making processesRequest for information relating to Whānau Ora
Case notesDisclosure while policy advice still under consideration by Ministers would prejudice ongoing decision making process—disclosure of inter-agency consultation would inhibit future expression of free and frank opinions by officialsRequest for staff named in emails about genetically modified corn
Case notesSection 6(d) OIA did not apply—no real and objective risk of danger to safety—s 9(2)(g)(ii) OIA did not apply—many of the names were already publicly available in connection with this issue and no harm had ensued—section 9(2)(g)(i) OIA did not apply—infRequest for names of members of advisory committee on national standards for abortion services in New Zealand
Case notesSection 9(2)(g)(ii) OIA applied— Abortion Supervisory Committee provided evidence of past instances of harassment—reasonable likelihood that release would lead to improper pressure or harassment which would impact on the ability and willingness of commiRequest for information about review of schools’ operational funding
Case notesInformation not of an advisory nature—information tendered by an external advisory group, not Ministers or officials—disclosure would not prejudice ability of Ministers to consider advice eventually tendered by officials—s 9(2)(f)(iv) did not applyRequest for Information relating to appointment of an honorary consul in Monaco
Case notesConfidentiality can diminish over time—s 9(2)(f)(iv) does not applyRequest for advice on electoral finance, after the introduction of the Electoral Finance Bill
Case notesIntroduction of Bill constituted discrete end-point in the policy development process—disclosure would not prejudice ability of Ministers to consider advice eventually tendered by officials—s 9(2)(f)(iv) does not applyRequest for options and analysis in review of NZ Superannuation Portability
Case notesCabinet had agreed to package of proposals but agreement was subject to funding in Budget— Budget secrecy only applies if decision has been made to include proposals in Budget—analysis protected by s 9(2)(f)iv) but not bare options—advice two years old and no advice issued about which options were under consideration—strong public interest in release of bare optionsRequest for information about funding of Resource Teachers
Case notesAdvice provided in context of Budget but bid unsuccessful—Minister asked for bid to be resubmitted in next Budget—9(2)(f)(iv) applied to much of the information at issue, but not all of it—Minister released some general information but continued to withhold detailed analysis—overall public interest not served by the disclosure of advice that may undermine the effective preparation of next BudgetRequest for information concerning South Auckland primary teacher supply
Case notesDecisions had been made—disclosure of abandoned options posed no risk—s 9(2)(f)(iv) does not applyRequest for stock take report on the Crime Reduction Strategy
Case notesReport by external consultant not advice tendered by Ministers or officials—s 9(2)(f)(iv) did not applyRequest for Treasury analysis on emissions trading scheme
Case notesInformation part of ongoing stream of work—release, with or without the context, would compromise the policy development process—s 9(2)(f)(iv) applies—overall public interest not served by disclosure of information that would undermine policy development—most advice would be released proactively when the framework document was releasedRequest for advice on daylight savings and 2011 Rugby World Cup
Case notesAnticipatory advice—no opinions or recommendations—s 9(2)(f)(iv) does not apply—public interest in disclosure—issues of national importance demand timely transparencyRequest for draft answers to parliamentary questions
Case notesDraft answers to parliamentary questions protected by s 9(2)(f)(iv)—parliamentary process sufficiently held the Minister to accountRequest for advice on electoral finance
Case notesRequest for advice generated on Government’s proposals for electoral finance—advice formed part of ongoing process and no decisions had been made—s 9(2)(f)(iv) provides good reason to withhold