Ruling grants request for formal court record, including minutes, directions, judgments
Regarding an application for access to the court documents in two significant worker-status proceedings heard by the New Zealand Employment Court, the court refused access to the hearing transcripts but allowed access to the formal court record.
In Courage v Attorney-General [2026] NZEmpC 144, the applicant filed the access request on behalf of media organisation BusinessDesk for “media reporting” on the Gloriavale community’s commercial aspects and organisational structure.
The second defendants in this case did not oppose access to the formal court record because the substantive judgments and directions were mostly in the public domain.
However, the second defendants objected to access to the hearing transcripts. They alleged that the evidence concerned deeply personal matters involving vulnerable community members, including serious personal allegations.
Counsel for the attorney-general, the first defendant in this case, submitted that any access should strictly abide by non-publication and suppression orders previously issued in hearings and other courts.
Subject to strict compliance with all existing non-publication and suppression orders, the Employment Court of New Zealand allowed the applicant to access to the formal court record – including the judgments, minutes, and directions – pursuant to r 8 of the Senior Courts (Access to Court Documents) Rules 2017.
However, the Employment Court found it inappropriate to grant access to the hearing transcripts upon balancing the relevant factors under r 12 of the Rules.
The court acknowledged substantive judgments delivered in both proceedings some time ago. However, the court recognised that the broader proceedings remained ongoing. Applying r 13(a) and r 13(c) of the Rules, the court found that the current access request:
The court held that the evidence in the transcripts included “a significant amount of personal and highly sensitive information,” much of which was covered by objection or non-publication orders.
The court was unclear about how the deeply personal and sensitive evidence bore on Gloriavale’s commercial aspects and organisational structure.
Given that the Companies Register, Charities Register, and the publicly available substantive judgments already detailed Gloriavale’s commercial structures, the court concluded that granting access to the transcripts was apparently unnecessary to achieve the applicant’s aims.
Enjoy this story? Read the latest employment and labour law news on the main page!
