A v ATTORNEY-GENERAL HC WN CIV-2013-485-522

A v ATTORNEY-GENERAL HC WN CIV-2013-485-522

The court reissued the judgment with the redactions proposed by the respondents to preserve A's anonymity until further order, held that Ms Rebstock may complete and submit the report to the State Services Commissioner provided any parts identifying A remain confidential to the Commissioner, and declined to award...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-069cb7af_abe4_42ce_87e0_3c8cb41f3cd3.pdf
Parties
Applicant: A; First Respondent: Her Majesty's Attorney-General; Second Respondent: Paula Rebstock
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
15 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment (addendum)
Outcome
Judgment reissued with redactions to preserve applicant anonymity; suppression of any details that might identify A to remain until further order; report may be completed and submitted to the Commissioner if identifying parts remain confidential to the Commissioner; costs to lie where they fall.
Legal Topics
Anonymity, Suppression Orders, Disclosure to Public Authorities, Publication of Judgments, Costs
Administrative Law Public Law Civil Procedure Confidentiality Law Judicial Review Anonymity Suppression Orders Disclosure to Public Authorities +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A

Applicant

Her Majesty's Attorney-General

First Respondent

Paula Rebstock

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment (addendum)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interim suppression orders and restraints on completion and delivery of the report should continue pending appeal
  2. 2 Whether the High Court should permit completion and submission of the investigative report to the State Services Commissioner with confidentiality safeguards
  3. 3 Whether the judgment should be published or suppressed in whole or in part pending appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The court reissued the judgment with the redactions proposed by the respondents to preserve A's anonymity until further order, held that Ms Rebstock may complete and submit the report to the State Services Commissioner provided any parts identifying A remain confidential to the Commissioner, and declined to award costs, directing that costs lie where they fall.

Court Disposition

Judgment reissued with redactions to preserve applicant anonymity; suppression of any details that might identify A to remain until further order; report may be completed and submitted to the Commissioner if identifying parts remain confidential to the Commissioner; costs to lie where they fall.

Orders

  • Judgment reissued with the redactions proposed by the respondents
  • Any details that might lead to identification of A are suppressed until further order of this Court or the Court of Appeal