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.
38 Resources Show all
OIA compliance and practice in New Zealand Customs Service 2022
Official Information Practice InvestigationsThis report was released as part of ‘Ready or not?’, an investigation into OIA practices at 12 core agencies.Requests to Ministry of Health and ESR for Covid-19 cycle threshold values
Case notesInformation requested initially refused for privacy reasons. The agencies subsequently focused on section 9(2)(c) of the OIA (to avoid prejudice to public health or safety measures).WorkSafe’s decision not to formally investigate an incident
Case notesComplaint about WorkSafe’s decision not to investigate and lay charges following an accident causing injury – failure to consider all relevant information – failure to engage meaningfully with the complainant – no evidence that documents had been faMaking official information requests: A guide for requesters
Official informationIf you are seeking information from a Minister, or central or local government agency, you may be able to ask for it under either the OIA or LGOIMA.Requests for reasons for a decision or recommendation: A guide to section 23 of the OIA and section 22 of the LGOIMA
Official informationThis is a guide to requests made under section 23 of the OIA (section 22 of the LGOIMA).Conclusive reasons for refusing requests: A guide to the conclusive withholding grounds in section 6 of the OIA and LGOIMA
Official informationThis is a guide to section 6 of the OIA and LGOIMA, which provides conclusive reasons for withholding official information. These reasons are not subject to a public interest test.Request for information about Operation Burnham
Case notesSection 6(c) can potentially apply to prevent prejudice to the conduct of an inquiry under the Inquiries Act—however, blanket refusal was not justified—basic and uncontested factual material could be provided—section 6(c) applied where questions soughtRequest for information about staff grievances and allegations of bullying
OpinionsSam Sherwood, on behalf of Stuff, made a request to Selwyn District Council for information about staff grievances and allegations of bullying.Request for CAA investigation report on Minister’s airport security breach
Case notesSection 9(2)(a) OIA applied to information that would identify Minister’s staff—s 9(2)(a) did not apply to non-sensitive information about actions that occurred in a public place, or to the name of the Investigator—s 6(c) did not apply to information suAdequacy of ex gratia payment to remedy mistake by Customs
Case notesNZ Customs officer rejected passenger on flight because water damage on passport—Ombudsman found officers failed to process the passport adequately and caused considerable cost to passenger because of this failure—complainant upheld and complainant received full payment to cover financial lossesDepartment of Internal Affairs provides reasonable service and advice to traveller on temporary passport
Case notesWhether the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) reasonably handled revalidation of a passport for New Zealand citizen travelling on temporary passport—Ombudsman concluded DIA had made every effort to inform the complainant of the steps needed to have his passport validatedRequest for information about Pike River Mine
Case notesSection 6(c) OIA applied—release of information directly relevant to the Royal Commission of Inquiry would be likely to prejudice the effective conduct of the InquiryRequest for information about the operation of the Spring Creek Coal Mine
Case notesInformation was ‘official information’—Section 6(c) OIA did not apply—information not directly relevant to inquiry—release not likely to prejudice the effective conduct of the Royal Commission of InquiryRequest for information about Police investigation into complaint against Minister
Case notesSection 6(c) OIA did not apply—no prejudice to the maintenance of the law in circumstances where the investigation had concluded and no charges had been laid—s 9(2)(a) applied—high privacy interest given the nature of the allegations and the fact that nRequest for reasons about unsuccessful reappointment
Case notesExtent of detail required in response to s 23 request depends on circumstances of particular case – a requester may still have questions after they receive statement of reasons but that does not mean statement is inadequate – s 23(2A) only protects evaluative material that has been ‘supplied’ by someone elseDepartment of Internal Affairs not unreasonable to cancel passport
Case notesDepartment of Internal Affairs—decision to recall and cancel complainant’s NZ passport – position determined by terms of legislationRequest for reasons about non-appointment
Case notesInadequate statement of reasons – more detail and specificity necessary to meet the requirements of s 23Request for information relating to an investigation into alleged destruction of documents held by NZDF
Case notesRequest for information relating to an investigation into alleged destruction of documents held by New Zealand Defence Force—information withheld to prevent prejudice to the outcome of those inquiries—s 6(c) applied at the time the request was refused—information later released due to change in circumstancesRequest for details of prison security system
Case notesPrison inmate sought details of prison security system and name of company who installed it—release would be likely to prejudice the integrity of systemRequest to Police for information regarding alleged threats made against Judge
Case notesRequest for information provided to Police concerning alleged threats made by person/s connected with the requester’s family—refused on the basis that disclosure would reveal identity of the informant—mixture of ’personal information’ and ‘official information’—joint investigation with Privacy CommissionerRequest by shareholder of a company to the Securities Commission for a copy of a report of an investigation carried out on the company
Case notesRequest by a shareholder of a company to the Securities Commission for copy of a report of an investigation carried out on the company—information withheld to protect the maintenance of the law and obligations of confidence—test for withholding under s 6(c) not met—s 9(2)(ba)(i) provided good reason to withhold some informationRequest for Department’s reasons for declining application
Case notesDepartment maintains it had given its reasons previously, in writing and verbally on many occasions—requirements of s 23 had not been met—compliant statement of reasons providedRequest for sentencing schedule database
Case notesRequest for sentencing schedule database—request declined—release of some information ‘would be likely’ to prejudice maintenance of the law—information released subject to deletionsRequests for names of food outlets which did not meet food hygiene standards
Case notesRequests for names of food outlets which did not meet food hygiene standards—requests refused—disclosure would be likely to prejudice the investigation and detection of food hygiene and health offencesRequest for details of APEC security arrangements
Case notesRequest for details of APEC security arrangements declined—information withheld—disclosure would be likely to prejudice effectiveness of future security arrangementsRequest for reasons for decision made three years earlier
Case notesRequest for reasons for decision made three years earlier—request declined on grounds it was not ‘made within a reasonable time of the making of the decision’—decision to decline request upheldRequest by Land Transport Safety Authority to Police for details of ‘diversion’ of applicant seeking driver identification card
Case notesRequest by Land Transport Safety Authority to Police for details of ‘diversion’ of applicant for a driver identification card—request declined—disclosure would undermine purposes of ‘diversion scheme’—maintenance of the lawNew Zealand Customs Service questioned over acceptance of deposit pursuant to legislation
Case notesRefusal to pay interest following resolution of dispute over Customs value of goods—whether relevant documentation provided at the time of importation—whether s 140 of the Customs Act 1966 (repealed) conferred authority on Department to take deposit—investigation discontinued following discovery that company did not exist as legal entity at the time complaint was madeRequest for information framed in terms of section 23
Case notesRequest framed in terms of s 23—Crown Law sought details of requester’s personal interest in information at issue—requester objected on grounds of his right to seek information—Crown Law had not acted improperly in seeking further information from the requester—if an organisation fails to recognise that a request falls within the scope of s 23 and by error processes it pursuant to the more general provisions in Part 2 of the Act, a requester may be deprived of information to which he or she is entitled—no formal investigation—requester invited to advise Crown Law whether he had any personal interest in the decision in questionSerious Fraud Office decision to withhold information under the SFO Act found not to be unreasonable in Ombudsmen Act terms
Case notesThe secrecy provisions of Serious Fraud Office Act 1990 and its relationship with Official Information Act were considered in an investigation involving the Serious Fraud Office—a complaint had been made to that agency about an allegation of fraud by a bank official and the agency found no evidence of fraud—the complainant pursued the matter in court, requesting information from the SFO which was declined on the basis of the SFO’s discretion to withhold information—the Ombudsman concluded the OIA did not apply to the information at issue but under the Ombudsmen Act the withholding of the information could be considered (being a decision in terms of the Ombudsmen Act)—the Ombudsman found the SFO’s use of discretion was not unreasonableDepartment of Conservation resolves impasse concerning ivory-key piano held by New Zealand Customs
Case notesRefusal to release piano imported from United Kingdom—family heirloom from 1920s—need for approval of Department of Conservation under CITES because of ivory content—conflict between New Zealand legislation implementing CITES and European Community Regulations—impasse resolved by acceptance of statutory declaration by family—conflict to be raised with CITES SecretariatRequest for health information about person charged with murder
Case notesRequest for information about care of patient by mental health services of person charged with murder—information withheld under s 6(c) to avoid prejudice to right to a fair trial