Search Results

1. Regulatory Impact Statement - Criminal justice proposals to counter foreign interference in New Zealand [pdf, 2.3 MB]

   ...occur. To account for this, we sought feedback on the options from entities within government that hold key constitutional or independent roles and/or relevant sector specific insights. This included engagement with the Office of the Ombudsman, the Privacy Commission and Universities New Zealand. Other countries have identified similar limitations or gaps in their own criminal offence regimes related to foreign interference and espionage activity. In developing options, we also considere...

2. AML/CFT Reform Worksteams 2 and 3 Full-Pack FINAL [pdf, 3.6 MB]

   ...Zealand, New Zealand Customs Service, The Treasury, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, Inland Revenue, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (Policy Advisory Group), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, the Public Service Commission, the Ministry for Regulation, and the Parliamentary Counsel Office. Communications 53. I intend to publicly announce these proposals in due course. Proactive Release 54. I intend to...

3. [2014] NZEmpC 63 Bracewell v Richmond Services Ltd [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...the time that has elapsed since the communication was made or the information was compiled or prepared; and (ii) the extent to which the information has already been disclosed to other persons; and (g) society’s interest in protecting the privacy of victims of offences and, in particular, victims of sexual offences. (4) The Judge may, in addition to the matters stated in subsection (3), have regard to any other matters that the Judge considers relevant. (5) A Judge may g...

4. [2014] NZEmpC 219 D’Arcy- Smith v Natural Habitats Ltd [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...the defendant had already provided two of the documents to Mr D’Arcy-Smith during the Authority process; that seven of the documents sought were irrelevant or did not exist; and that two of the documents were “subject to the provisions of the Privacy Act 1993 … and in particular Information Privacy Principle 11 (Limits on Disclosure of Personal Information).” 3 D’Arcy-Smith v Natural Habitats Limited [2014] NZERA Auckland...

5. [2013] NZEmpC 219 Fox v Hereworth School Trust Board [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...thereby, s 56B of the District Courts Act 1947. The Court cannot uphold an objection to disclosure on any other ground. [15] The purposes of an Ombudsman investigation or inquiry pursuant to the Ombudsmen Act, the Official Information Act and the Privacy Act 1993 (under one or more of which I understand Mrs and Dr Fox have complained) is quite different to the process of disclosure of relevant documents in litigation between parties, even although one of those parties may be the s...

6. IT v KRR [2015] NZIACDT 66 (28 May 2015) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...he cannot recover it. Had he not done so, I would have no hesitation in upholding the complaint as I have found that the fee was not fair or reasonable. [31] The Statement of Complaint does not raise issues relating the form of the agreement or privacy issues arising in respect of referring the matter to a debt collection agency. In relation to the latter, Taylor v Orcon Ltd [2015] NZHRRT 15 reviews certain privacy obligations, which may have reciprocal professional disciplinary consequ...

7. Appellant v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 410) & Geoffrey Twigden [2017] NZREADT 79 [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...the decision. Discussion [30] Pursuant to s 108(1) of the Act (as relevant to this case): (1) If [the Tribunal] is of the opinion that it is proper to do so, having regard to the interest of any person (including (without limitation) the privacy of the complainant (if any)) and to the public interest, it may make 1 or more of the following orders: (a) An order prohibiting the publication of any report or account of any part of any proceedings before it, whether held in publ...

8. Director of Proceedings v Nelson (Costs) [2014] NZHRRT 33 [pdf, 60 KB]

   ...[13]-[18]. We repeat the caveat in para [16] of that decision. The civil litigation rule that costs follow the event may not be appropriate in the context of the human rights-centred jurisdiction of the Tribunal under the Human Rights Act 1993, the Privacy Act 1993 and the HDC Act. Too little attention has hitherto been given to the terms of s 105 of the Human Rights Act which applies also in proceedings under the Privacy Act (see s 89 of that Act) and under the HDC Act (see s 58 of tha...

9. VJ v JT LCRO 279/2014 (2 September 2015) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...integrity as an officer of the Court. Mr VJ says Ms JT made unnecessary allegations against BB, who was not involved in the proceeding, did not take reasonable steps to ensure the allegations she put were 2 accurate, and did not protect BB’s privacy. Mr VJ says Ms JT’s line of questioning was not relevant to any matter to be determined in the proceeding, lacked any reasonable foundation by reference to credible information in Ms JT’s possession, and that her conduct b...

10. Proactive release – Family Court (Family Violence and Other Matters) Amendment Rules 2019 and other legislative instruments [pdf, 782 KB]

    ...comply with each of the following: 19.1 the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi; 19.2 the rights and freedoms contained in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 or the Human Rights Act 1993; 19.3 the principles and guidelines set out in the Privacy Act 1993; 19.4 relevant international standards and obligations; and 19.5 the Legislation Guidelines (2018 edition), which are maintained by the Legislation Design and Advisory Committee. Regulations Review Committee 19 There...