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.
6 Resources Show all
Administrative error resulting in lost opportunity for ACC claim
Case notesA patient who was unaware he had asbestosis underwent a CT scan while being treated at a DHB Hospital. On the scan’s accompanying notes a radiologist noted previous asbestos exposure. This CT scan with accompanying notes was misfiled, for unknown reasons, and the patient’s diagnosis of asbestosis was not confirmed until autopsy.Ministry of Health unreasonably disallowed visiting Australian resident access to publicly funded health services
Case notesWhether the Ministry of Health was unreasonable to determine that medical treatment obtained by a visitor to New Zealand was not ‘immediately necessary’ and therefore not covered by reciprocal health agreement with Australia – Ombudsman considered the Ministry of Health erred – complaint sustainedDepartment of Corrections staff to follow legislative requirements when segregating inmate
Case notesDepartment of Corrections held prisoner in Management Unit without following required procedure—segregation legislation and regulations are clear and prescriptiveCorrections unreasonable not to pay for inmate’s glasses for re-integration programme
Case notesLong serving prison inmate required glasses to participate in reintegration programme and work in prison tailor shop—Department of Corrections refused to pay for glasses unless inmate would refund them through his prison earnings—inmate later found out Department had paid for another inmate’s glasses in full—Ombudsman sustained complaint that inmate was not treated fairly—refund to inmate of money paid recommended.Ministry of Health reconsiders decision to charge for collation of information
Case notesRequester sought draft and final copies of public health contracts for four financial years between Ministry of Health and 42 providers—Ministry agreed to release but subject to charge of $24,000—Ombudsman sought basis for charge—request for vast amount of information requiring substantial collation—charge applied in accordance with Ministry of Justice Charging Guidelines—however, Ministry had previously released part of requested information to an MP free of charge—Ombudsman did not consider it reasonable now to charge member of public for same information—Ministry agreed to review decision and release that particular information again free of charge and assist requester to refine request for outstanding informationCrown Health Enterprise reminded to exercise discretionary powers reasonably
Case notesUnreasonable decision to charge two fees where patient in hospital for period falling into two financial years