New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Access to personal information

Legal area

Court

13 Aug 2019

GUO v CULPAN [2019] NZHC 1963

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1963
Court

High Court

The Court dismissed the judicial review and appeal: the Co-Chairperson lawfully struck out irrelevant portions of the applicant's reply evidence; lawfully refused a late witness summons seeking non-party documents of dubious relevance after discovery had closed; lawfully refused an adjournment requested one week before hearing where counsel was available only outside the hearing dates; lawfully declined to recuse as no reasonable apprehension of bias existed; and the Tribunal lawfully struck out the proceeding under s115A as likely to cause prejudice because the applicant steadfastly refused…
29 Mar 2012

GRUPEN V THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RIGHTS PROCEEDINGS HC AK CIV-2010-404-8332

Citation

openlaw-f562fe6d_424a_4385_a687_7c6a4bae0039.pdf
Court

High Court

Diary entries recording meetings and telephone calls with the individual were information about that identifiable person (personal information); as an agency the appellant was obliged under IPP6 to provide access unless a proper statutory basis to refuse existed; appellant had no proper basis under s29 or s43 to refuse or to substitute only a transcript; refusal therefore constituted an interference under s66(2) and the Tribunal was entitled to award damages under s88; consequently the Tribunal's decision and damages award were upheld.
21 Mar 2012

GEARY v NEW ZEALAND PSYCHOLOGISTS BOARD HC WN CIV-2011-485-2068

Citation

openlaw-b15b5e8c_c51c_4275_99a0_58dfe1856644.pdf
Court

High Court

Court upheld Tribunal on procedural fairness; held the ACC client list constituted personal information of the listed clients not of the appellant and that disclosure by the prosecutor did not establish a breach by the Board in the circumstances; found no proven breach in relation to the 14 January 2005 request; found the Board breached Principle 6 by failing to disclose the existence of two historic complaints in response to the 3 May 2005 request but that the contents of those complaints were properly withheld under s29(1)(a); declined damages but concluded a formal declaration should have…
6 Sept 2010

C V THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RIGHTS PROCEEDINGS HC AK CIV-2010-404-001662

Citation

openlaw-55934fd3_4b86_442e_aa6b_26efb39a49d3.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court upheld that denial of access to personal information caused significant humiliation and injury to feelings warranting compensatory damages but reduced quantum to $5,000 after accounting for the defendant's conduct and contextual mitigation under s85(4); the Court granted permanent name suppression because identification of the doctor added nothing to public interest while publication risked irreparable harm to the medical practice and vulnerable patients.
19 Nov 2009

REID V NEW ZEALAND FIRE SERVICE COMMISSION AND ORS HC WN CIV-2008-485-1203

Citation

openlaw-42f9e25e_d5ab_4873_b492_99fd4a257db2.pdf
Court

High Court

The High Court concluded the Crown Law Office validly invoked litigation privilege over the documents, which placed them within the exception to disclosure under the Privacy Act 1993; Mr Reid failed to demonstrate any matter of sufficient importance or any arguable legal error to justify leave to further appeal on either the substantive or costs proceedings.
20 Apr 2009

STOVES V COMMISSIONER OF POLICE HC CHCH CIV-2009-409-000011

Citation

openlaw-6dc7cf9e_00a0_4d88_af31_8bf4c9d5db6a.pdf
Court

High Court

The appeal is struck out because the 30 day appeal period in s123(4) Human Rights Act 1993 was not complied with and that time limit is not extendable; moreover, on the merits the Tribunal correctly applied s27(1)(c) of the Privacy Act 1993 and law protecting informant anonymity, and there is no special exception merely because the informant may be connected to a public sector organisation; disclosure was likely to prejudice the maintenance of the law and would have a chilling effect on informants.
17 Dec 2007

SIEVWRIGHTS V APOSTOLAKIS HC WN CIV 2005 485 527

Citation

openlaw-4e3115e0_1ba8_47e1_abc7_0c3a35c5a4fd.pdf
Court

High Court

The 3 March 1997 letter constituted personal information about identifiable individuals (the Apostolakises); the 22 April 1997 request by the client for a copy objectively triggered Privacy Act obligations under Principle 6; the letter was readily retrievable by Sievwrights at that time and their failure to supply it amounted to an interference with Mrs Apostolakis's privacy; the Tribunal's award of $2,500 compensatory damages and refusal to grant costs to Sievwrights for the aborted proceedings were upheld; costs for the appeal payable to the Privacy Commissioner on a 2B basis and respondent…

New Zealand Case Law

GUO v CULPAN [2019] NZHC 1963

GRUPEN V THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RIGHTS PROCEEDINGS HC AK CIV-2010-404-8332

GEARY v NEW ZEALAND PSYCHOLOGISTS BOARD HC WN CIV-2011-485-2068

C V THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RIGHTS PROCEEDINGS HC AK CIV-2010-404-001662

REID V NEW ZEALAND FIRE SERVICE COMMISSION AND ORS HC WN CIV-2008-485-1203

STOVES V COMMISSIONER OF POLICE HC CHCH CIV-2009-409-000011

SIEVWRIGHTS V APOSTOLAKIS HC WN CIV 2005 485 527