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.
31 Resources Show all
Request for cost of recruiting Vice-Chancellor
Case notesRelease of total cost would not unreasonably prejudice third party’s commercial position—no specific negotiations—release of total costs would not deter businesses from treating with government—public interest in accountability for spending public moneyRequest for price of successful tenderer (weekly license fee to operate and occupy Riverbank Market)
Case notesNo need to withhold successful tender price—s 7(2)(i) does not apply—public interest in release to promote integrity and transparency of tender processCancellation of transport card and refusal to refund money stored on the card
Case notesA complaint was made against Auckland Transport (AT) about its cancellation of an ‘AT HOP’ card used by commuters on Auckland’s public transport system.Request for information associated with PHARMAC’s 2016/17 budget bid
Case notesPHARMAC did not have a commercial position and was not engaged in commercial activities—s 9(2)(j) applies to information about PHARMAC’s willingness to pay for pharmaceuticals but not to PHARMAC’s indicative budget in out-yearsRequest for correspondence about Total Mobility Scheme
Case notesRevealing the respective positions and concerns of the parties to the negotiation would lead to reduced cooperation and information sharing, and decrease likelihood of compromise—s 7(2)(i) appliesRequest for amount budgeted for staff remuneration
Case notesReleasing staff remuneration budget would undermine the Council’s bargaining position and prejudice ability to negotiate effectively with staff and representatives—s 7(2)(i) appliesRequest for information about Hauraki Treaty negotiations
Case notesRelease would prejudice the goodwill of the parties and the progress of the negotiations—s 9(2)(j) appliesLocal Authority’s efforts to mitigate effects of resource consent errors not unreasonable
Case notesLocal Authority decision about wall constructed on boundary—Council erred by not requiring resource consent and then offered assistance to owners to lodge application—complainant considered Council unfair not to offer assistance to him to oppose the consentLocal Authority’s Code of Compliance Certificate on drainage reasonable in circumstances
Case notesLocal Authority decision on detection of cross connection piping problem not unreasonable—Body Corporation of building forced to pay costs—question whether Code of Compliance Certificate should have been issued—Ombudsman concluded Council not aware of problemRegional Authority decision on resource consent for pergola on non-notified basis not unreasonable
Case notesRegional Authority’s decision to grant resource consent for a pergola on a non-notified basis was reasonable in the circumstance—permitted baseline test under section 95E of the Resource Management Act 1991Local Authority’s Trespass Notice unreasonable in circumstances
Case notesLocal Authority issued Trespass Notice for two years at sports stadium—Ombudsman noted serious misconduct on part of complainant to warrant action but trespass sanction extreme—complaint sustained and Council implemented Ombudsman’s recommendationsLocal Authority did not act unreasonably in remedying damage following tree removal
Case notesLocal Authority—removal of two pohutukawa trees—Council agreed to mitigate loss of these in conjunction with the land owner—Ombudsman considered Council did not act unreasonablyRequest for risk assessment report on Hut Creek Mine
Case notesRelease would prejudice or disadvantage agency’s negotiations to acquire mining permit— s 9(2)(j) appliesLocal Authority unreasonably created expectation concerning amenity design
Case notesLocal Authority refused to redesign toilet block as promised—Ombudsman considered advice to complainant unreasonable—Council then agreed to redesignRequest for access to papers deposited in National Archives
Case notesRequest for access to certain papers deposited in National Archives—request declined on basis that access to the papers was restricted—condition made by former Minister at time of deposit that access subject to his consent—he declined to give consent—release would be contrary to specified enactment—Archives Act 1957, s 20(1)Request for reports relating to INCIS project
Case notesRequest to Police for INCIS reports—reports withheld in their entirety—change in circumstances since request refused affecting outcome of review—good reason to withhold information would be established if request made at time of review—investigation discontinued on basis that whatever view might be formed as to correctness of decision to withhold, no recommendation for release would be madeRequest for reports held by Ministry of Commerce
Case notesApplication of Companies Act 1993, s 367(2)—information withheld pursuant to s 367(2)—investigation showed s 367(2) applied to information at issue—investigation under Ombudsmen Act precluded—right of appeal to High Court available under Companies Act—Ombudsmen Act 1975, s 13(7)(a); Companies Act 1993, ss 365, 367(2), 368Council property sale conducted but complainants not advised about status of their objection petition
Case notesCouncil resolved to sell property of historic significance and occupants petitioned Council to reverse its decision—Council referred petition to committees for consideration and report but before reports completed, concluded the sale of property—the occupants complained of failure of Council to follow due process (failure to report) but failure did not mean complaint could be sustained—however procedural shortcomings acknowledged by Council and apology extended to complainantLocal Authority fails to follow legislative procedures when setting fee for dog registration
Case notesLocal Authority imposes Dog Control Fees by resolution of Committee—there is a requirement for resolution of territorial authority to take particular matters to be taken into account under the Dog Control Act 1996, s 37 and Local Government Act 1974, s 114Q—Council failed to follow legislative procedures when setting registration feesDistrict Council not unreasonable to retain credit balance in rates account
Case notesEarly payment of rates—credit balance in rates account— whether local authority has obligation to make refund on requestLocal Authorities must comply with LGOIMA intent when setting rules
Case notesA Deed of Confidentiality was distributed to Councillors for signature, with the aim to protect information relating to the Council’s business and affairs—Councillor was concerned that signing the document would conflict with the intentions under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) and also that Councillors who don’t sign would have restrictions on information they received—Ombudsman ruled that under LGOIMA, a Council may not put rules in place which are inconsistent with the Act and Councils cannot withhold information from Councillors who have not signed that confidentiality agreementDistrict Council accepts wider interpretation of ‘household’
Case notesImposition of two sewer charges—whether complainant’s mother part of the ‘household’— interpretation of Rating Powers Act 1988, s 30Local Authority required to ensure potable water condition meets standards
Case notesComplaint about potable water condition of subdivision consent where supply did not meet requirements under New Zealand Drinking Water Standards 1984 (revised 2005 and 2008)—Ombudsman found local authority failed to interpret data correctly before issuing resource consent on the subdivision—the water quality was substandard and the local authority provided incorrect advice about improving the quality—the local authority was required to compensate the complainants who had to obtain potable water from another sourceCity Council not required to consider legal costs regarding enforcement order
Case notesClaim for reimbursement of legal costs incurred obtaining an Enforcement Order—Court awarded costs—insufficient to cover full costs—co-operation between complainant and City Council prior to proceedings—costs not covered in agreement—claim not upheldCouncil accepts practical solution to resolve concerns about building consent
Case notesBuilding consent for garage—garage constructed to wrong plans—Council issues notice to rectify—retrospective consent granted—withdrawal of notice to rectifyCommunity Boards fall under Ombudsmen jurisdiction if decision(s) made other than by Committee as a whole
Case notesJurisdiction—Community Board—decisions of full Board outside jurisdiction—scope of jurisdiction limited to acts or decisions of committees, subcommittees, officers, employees or members of Board—Ombudsmen Act 1975, s 13(1) and (2)City Council offers partial rebate for charge on excess water usage
Case notesExcess water usage charges—local authority policy on rebates—partial or full rebate—hidden leakageLocal Authority rejects Ombudsman’s recommendation to monitor nuisance as required under RMA
Case notesLocal Authority failed to respond to complaints from residents about dust and noise nuisance. What it should have done was to consider complaints from residents by undertaking relevant surveys and tests to determine the extent of the problem being complained about (this is a responsibility under ss17 and 35 of the Resource Management Act 1991)—complaint sustained —Ombudsman recommended the Local Authority monitor noise and nuisance effects—recommendation rejectedLocal Authority issued a Project Information Memorandum (PIM) unlawfully
Case notesProperty developer changed basis of development and obtained new Project Information Memorandum (PIM) containing conditions not prescribed in s 31(2) of the Building Act 1991—complainant considered the contents of the PIM unauthorised as the changes had not been agreed to by purchasers of the owner developing the property and action incurring legal expenses—Ombudsman found PIM not issued lawfully but agreed for Authority to amend the PIM to comply with LGOIMA—complainant offered ex gratia payment in recognition of legal costs incurredLocal Authority issues non-notified resource consent for vacant site
Case notesNon-notified resource consent application granted for vacant site – neighbours claimed damage resulted from excavations and complained about the height of the building erected—Ombudsman investigated and found no apparent breach of s 94 of the Resource Management Act or District Plan rules and concluded the Local Authority was not unreasonable to issue a non-notified consent in this case—complaint not sustained—question of liability for damage allegedly incurred by complainants was a civil matter to be pursued in the courtsLocal Authorities should avoid unnecessary delay processing resource consents
Case notesTime limits for decisions made in respect of resource consent applications—ss 21 and 115 of the Resource Management Act—processing delays—responsibility of local authorities to avoid unreasonable delays