Steven Price

My book

Media Minefield

Guide to NZ Media Law

Official Information Act

Official Information Act

Bill of Rights Act

Media law resources

Feeds (RSS)

Suppression orders

« Previous Entries

Unhealthy secrecy?

Wednesday, March 20th, 2013

A hard call Was the coroner right to suppress the names of the health care workers involved in the tragic death of Zachary Gravatt of menigicoccal disease in 2009? After all, he found the hospital was swamped with swine flu victims and Zachary’s symptoms were very similar. He was given considerable care and attention, and […]

We don’t need no stinking press regulation

Thursday, December 6th, 2012

The Herald’s lawyer, Alan Ringwood, argues that we don’t need any statutory press regulation in NZ. Don’t listen to Levenson, he says. We don’t need to go there. (Full article here). I guess it’s not a news flash that the Herald’s lawyer would oppose statutory restrictions on the Herald. But I’m interested in his argument. […]

SC agrees to hear Siemer contempt appeal

Monday, July 30th, 2012

Do judges have power to suppress the contents of whole judgments in criminal cases? If not, then perhaps Vince Siemer has a defence to the contempt ruling against him for posting a suppressed judgment in the Urewera case.  The High Court and Court of Appeal said “yes” (discussions here and here). The Supreme Court has […]

Did the Crown breach the suppression order in the Ureweras case?

Wednesday, September 7th, 2011

The Crown tells us that as a result of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in the Urewera case, there is no longer sufficient evidence to justify the continuation of the proceedings against a number of those charged solely under the Arms Act… That is, the Crown has revealed that the Supreme Court has ruled some […]

An unprivileged position II

Thursday, September 16th, 2010

Tom Frewen [and Graeme Edgeler] noted that last year the Privileges Committee looked at the issue of the scope of the media’s privilege to report on proceedings in the House, and also concluded that it was much less than the media tend to think it is:  The media play an important role in providing the public with information about thebusiness […]

Super-Injunction denied

Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010

A fascinating insight into super-injunctions English football captain John Terry’s failed attempt to obtain an injunction gagging revelation of his affair with his team-mate’s ex contains a lot of fascinating information about so-called super-injunctions. A super-injunction is a gag that not only prevents particular information from being published, it also stops anyone even mentioning the […]

Name revelation

Friday, January 22nd, 2010

I see that Whale Oil has been publishing a series of posts under the heading “Interesting names” that contain nothing but a person’s name. I might take a wild stab in the dark and guess that those were names that had been suppressed. Is he breaking the law? It’s an offence to publish a name […]

Solicitor-General not going Whale hunting

Thursday, January 14th, 2010

The Solicitor-General has decided not to pursue Mr Oil for contempt of court “at this stage”, though he says he supports the prosecutions for name suppression. He adds that contempt proceedings “remain an option” if Mr Oil’s offending continues or escalates, but would probably be brought after the suppression breaches trial.

A whale of a campaign

Tuesday, January 12th, 2010

Sigh. I’ve been avoiding weighing in on Whale Oil’s campaign to reform NZ’s suppression laws, or failing that, render them useless. (In my absence, Andrew Geddis has done a good job). But it’s an issue that won’t die. It doesn’t help that the media seem endlessly fascinated by it, and by him. I won’t attempt […]

Fact Suppression

Sunday, November 29th, 2009

Which is worse: our name suppression laws, or the media’s coverage of them? Today, the Sunday Star-Times leads with a story headlined “Identity of high profile drug accused kept secret”. The story is about a familiar one: public figure gets name suppression; cue outrage. Never mind that this particular defendant’s name was not suppressed between […]

« Previous Entries