NEW HEALTH NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED v SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL [2017] NZSC 13
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and approved a single question for determination: whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appellant's appeals; the Court did not decide the merits but framed the issue for full hearing.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] NZSC 13
- Parties
- Applicant: New Health New Zealand Incorporated; First Respondent: South Taranaki District Council; Second Respondent: Attorney‑General for and on behalf of the Minister of Health
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 20 February 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court / Leave to Appeal Granted; Question Approved for Determination
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted and a question approved for determination by the Supreme Court; no substantive determination of the appeals' merits in this judgment.
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Judicial Review, Statutory Interpretation, Fluoridation of Drinking Water
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
New Health New Zealand Incorporated
Applicant
South Taranaki District Council
First Respondent
Attorney‑General for and on behalf of the Minister of Health
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court / Leave to Appeal Granted; Question Approved for Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appellant's appeals in CA159/2014, CA615/2014 and CA529/2015
- 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted to determine that question
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and approved a single question for determination: whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appellant's appeals; the Court did not decide the merits but framed the issue for full hearing.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted and a question approved for determination by the Supreme Court; no substantive determination of the appeals' merits in this judgment.
Orders
- Leave to appeal is granted.
- Approved question: whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeals of the appellant in CA159/2014, CA615/2014 and CA529/2015.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
NEW HEALTH NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED v SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL [2017] NZSC 13 [20 February 2017]IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALANDSC 141/2016[2017] NZSC 13BETWEEN NEW HEALTH NEW ZEALANDINCORPORATEDApplicantAND SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICTCOUNCILFirst RespondentATTORNEY-GENERAL for and on behalfof the Minister of HealthSecond RespondentCourt: William Young, Glazebrook and OʼRegan JJCounsel: M T Scholtens QC and L M Hansen for ApplicantD J S Laing and H P Harwood for First RespondentS V McKechnie and K G Stone for Second RespondentJudgment: 20 February 2017JUDGMENT OF THE COURTA Leave to appeal is granted (New Health New Zealand Inc v South Taranaki District Council [2016] NZCA 462, [2017] 2 NZLR 13).B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeals of the appellant in CA159/2014, CA615/2014 and CA529/2015.____________________________________________________________________REASONS[1] We note that if the Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Bill is passed the Court may ask for submissions on whether we should reconsider the grant of leave.Solicitors:Wynn Williams Lawyers, Christchurch for ApplicantSimpson Grierson, Wellington for First RespondentCrown Law Office, Wellington for Second Respondent