Search Results

1. 2017 NZSSAA 064 (9 November 2017) [pdf, 244 KB]

   ...purpose) completed by or on behalf of the applicant and his or her spouse or partner (if any) to the chief executive’s satisfaction; and … [14] The Chief Executive also asserted that to the extent the Appellant and his wife took issue with Privacy and Human Rights issues, they were matters for the Privacy Commissioner and the Human Rights Commission. 5 The Appellant’s Position [15] As noted, the Appellant’s argument is largely responsive to the Chief Execu...

2. Mitchell v Accident Compensation Corporation [2019] NZHRRT 29 [pdf, 206 KB]

   Reference No. HRRT 062/2016 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 BETWEEN DAVID MITCHELL PLAINTIFF AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION DEFENDANT AT WELLINGTON BEFORE: Ms MA Roche, Co-Chairperson Ms D Hart, Member Ms G Goodwin, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr D Mitchell in person Mr P McBride for defendant DATE OF HEARING: 13 and 14 May 2019 DATE OF DECISION: 5 June 2019 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL1 [1] David Mitchell has had a long and difficult...

3. [2024] NZREADT 16 TG v CAC 2204 & XW (5 June 2024) [pdf, 243 KB]

   ...a motel (the motel) using aerial photographs taken by a drone. The photographs depicted the surrounding neighbourhood, including the property of the appellant (the neighbour). He complained to the agency essentially about the invasion of his privacy, but he was not satisfied with the principal agent’s response. [2] The neighbour made a complaint under the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 (the Act) to the first respondent, the Real Estate Agents Authority (the Authority). The compl...

4. Family violence information sharing guidance [pdf, 3.4 MB]

   ...proactive disclosure? 18 D. When can I share information to protect a victim? 18 E. What is a risk or needs assessment? 19 F. What is “making, contributing to, or carrying out a plan”? 20 G. How is this different from what I could share before under the Privacy Act? 20 Principle 5: You must only share relevant information 22 A. What information is relevant? 22 B. What information isn’t relevant? 23 2 Principle 6: You should check the information is accurate 24 A. How accurate is �...

5. Sharing Information Safely [pdf, 3.4 MB]

   ...proactive disclosure? 18 D. When can I share information to protect a victim? 18 E. What is a risk or needs assessment? 19 F. What is “making, contributing to, or carrying out a plan”? 20 G. How is this different from what I could share before under the Privacy Act? 20 Principle 5: You must only share relevant information 22 A. What information is relevant? 22 B. What information isn’t relevant? 23 2 Principle 6: You should check the information is accurate 24 A. How accurate is �...

6. Information sharing arrangements

   To help deliver better services and reduce crime, victimisation and harm, the Ministry of Justice sometimes shares personal information with other government agencies. This is allowed by the Privacy Act 2020, and includes measures to protect people’s privacy. Find out more about Information Sharing on the Privacy Commissioner’s website Approved Information Sharing Agreements (AISAs) Approved information sharing agreements (AISAs) are one of the ways we share information to deliver public s...

   Located in:

   1. About >
   2. About us >
   3. Corporate publications

7. Green v New Zealand Police (Jurisdiction) [2019] NZHRRT 15 [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...OF NAME AND IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF THE PLAINTIFF AND POLICE WITNESS REFERRED TO IN DECISION (2) ORDER PREVENTING SEARCH OF THE TRIBUNAL FILE WITHOUT LEAVE OF THE TRIBUNAL OR OF THE CHAIRPERSON Reference No. HRRT 017/2017 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 BETWEEN MARGARET GREEN PLAINTIFF AND NEW ZEALAND POLICE DEFENDANT AT AUCKLAND BEFORE: Ms MA Roche, Co-Chairperson Dr SJ Hickey MNZM, Member Mr BK Neeson JP, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr D Neild for plaint...

8. Re Jones (Rejection of Statement of Claim) [2021] NZHRRT 19 [pdf, 116 KB]

   1 Reference No. HRRT 014/2021 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 2020 IN THE MATTER OF INTENDED PROCEEDINGS BY MICHAEL JOHN JONES AT WELLINGTON BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines ONZM QC, Chairperson REPRESENTATION: Mr MJ Jones in person The intended defendant was not heard DATE OF DECISION: 14 April 2021 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL THAT INTENDED STATEMENT OF CLAIM NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR FILING1 BACKGROUND [1] On Friday 12 March 2021 Mr Jones presented for filing...

9. Dotcom v Crown Law Office (Application for Compliance Orders) [2018] NZHRRT 29 [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...CIRCUMSTANCES (2) ORDER PREVENTING SEARCH OF THE TRIBUNAL FILE WITHOUT LEAVE OF THE TRIBUNAL OR OF THE CHAIRPERSON IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2018] NZHRRT 29 Reference No. HRRT 047/2016 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 BETWEEN KIM DOTCOM Plaintiff AND CROWN LAW OFFICE First Defendant CONT. AT WELLINGTON BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines ONZM QC, Chairperson REPRESENTATION: Mr RM Mansfield and Mr SL Cogan for pl...

10. Hawkins v New Zealand Police [2024] NZHRRT 8 [pdf, 258 KB]

    ...house on 20 May 2022 and delivered 1 [This decision is to be cited as Hawkins v New Zealand Police [2024] NZHRRT 8]. IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2024] NZHRRT 8 I TE TARAIPIUNARA MANA TANGATA REFERENCE NO. HRRT 040/2022 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 2020 BETWEEN ROGER KENNETH HAWKINS PLAINTIFF AND NEW ZEALAND POLICE DEFENDANT AT AUCKLAND BEFORE: Ms K Anderson, Deputy Chairperson Ms D Hart, Member Ms S Kai Fong, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr RK Hawkins...