THE NEW ZEALAND ANIMAL LAW ASSOCIATION v THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2021] NZHC 1275 [1 June 2021]

THE NEW ZEALAND ANIMAL LAW ASSOCIATION v THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2021] NZHC 1275 [1 June 2021]

Access to the respondents' evidence and submissions was granted because the public interest in open justice and the freedom to seek information favored disclosure post-hearing, and respondents did not oppose disclosure; however privacy interests under rule 13 required redaction of personal details in exhibit GAH-3 relating to the farm owner and enforcement officer, and those details must not be published.

Citation
[2021] NZHC 1275
Parties
First Applicant: The New Zealand Animal Law Association; Second Applicant: Save the Animals from Exploitation; First Respondent: The Attorney-General; Second Respondent: The Minister of Agriculture; Third Respondent: The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
1 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Under the Judicial Review Procedure Act 2016 and Animal Welfare Act 1999 / Application for Access to Court Documents (post Substantive Hearing) Following Judgment; Disposition Issued 1 June 2021
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Code of Welfare: Pigs 2018, Animal Welfare (care and Procedures) Regulations 2018, Access to Court Documents, Open Justice, Redaction and Privacy Protection
Administrative Law Judicial Review Animal Welfare Law Privacy Law Civil Procedure Code of Welfare: Pigs 2018 Animal Welfare (care and Procedures) Regulations 2018 Access to Court Documents +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The New Zealand Animal Law Association

First Applicant

Save the Animals from Exploitation

Second Applicant

The Attorney-General

First Respondent

The Minister of Agriculture

Second Respondent

The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Under the Judicial Review Procedure Act 2016 and Animal Welfare Act 1999 / Application for Access to Court Documents (post Substantive Hearing) Following Judgment; Disposition Issued 1 June 2021

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondents' evidence and submissions should be disclosed to a third party journalist under the Senior Courts (Access to Court Documents) Rules 2017
  2. 2 Whether privacy interests in exhibit GAH-3 outweigh the principle of open justice after the substantive hearing
  3. 3 Application of rule 11 and rule 13 balancing test at post-hearing stage

Ratio Decidendi

Access to the respondents' evidence and submissions was granted because the public interest in open justice and the freedom to seek information favored disclosure post-hearing, and respondents did not oppose disclosure; however privacy interests under rule 13 required redaction of personal details in exhibit GAH-3 relating to the farm owner and enforcement officer, and those details must not be published.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • Grant access to the respondents' evidence and submissions to Ms Andrea Graves (journalist).
  • Redact any personal details relating to the farm owner and the individual enforcement officer contained in exhibit GAH-3 to Mr Harrison's affidavit dated 9 March 2020; those redacted details must not be published in any form.