NORTHLAND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SOCIETY INCORPORATED v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY FOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIES [2018] NZSC 36
Leave to appeal was granted because the questions about the proper interpretation of the Forests Act export restriction and the scope of the Protected Objects Act in relation to swamp kauri raise matters of public and legal importance appropriate for determination by the Supreme Court.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] NZSC 36
- Parties
- Applicant: Northland Environmental Protection Society Incorporated; First Respondent: Chief Executive of the Ministry for Primary Industries; Second Respondent: Comptroller of Customs; Third Respondent: Chief Executive of the Ministry for Culture and Heritage
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 19 April 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Supreme Court Appeal (leave Granted) / Leave to Appeal Granted; Supreme Court Has Approved Questions for Determination
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted
- Legal Topics
- Interpretation of "finished or Manufactured Indigenous Timber Product", Effect of Export Restrictions in S 67 C of the Forests Act 1949, Definition of "protected New Zealand Object" in S 2(1) of the Protected Objects Act 1975, Status of Swamp Kauri
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Northland Environmental Protection Society Incorporated
Applicant
Chief Executive of the Ministry for Primary Industries
First Respondent
Comptroller of Customs
Second Respondent
Chief Executive of the Ministry for Culture and Heritage
Third Respondent
Procedural Posture
Supreme Court Appeal (leave Granted) / Leave to Appeal Granted; Supreme Court Has Approved Questions for Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Court of Appeal correctly interpreted "finished or manufactured indigenous timber product" and the export restrictions in s 67C of the Forests Act 1949
- 2 Whether the Court of Appeal correctly held that some or all swamp kauri is not a "protected New Zealand object" under s 2(1) of the Protected Objects Act 1975
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was granted because the questions about the proper interpretation of the Forests Act export restriction and the scope of the Protected Objects Act in relation to swamp kauri raise matters of public and legal importance appropriate for determination by the Supreme Court.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted
Orders
- Leave to appeal is granted (Northland Environmental Protection Society Incorporated v Chief Executive of the Ministry for Primary Industries [2017] NZCA 607).
- The approved questions are: (a) Was the Court of Appeal correct in its interpretation of "finished or manufactured indigenous timber product" and the effect of the export restrictions in s 67C of the Forests Act 1949? (b) Was the Court of Appeal correct to hold that some or all swamp kauri is not a "protected New...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
NORTHLAND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SOCIETY INCORPORATED v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFTHE MINISTRY FOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIES [2018] NZSC 36IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALANDI TE KŌTI MANA NUISC 10/2018[2018] NZSC 36BETWEEN NORTHLAND ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION SOCIETYINCORPORATEDApplicantAND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRYFOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIESFirst RespondentAND COMPTROLLER OF CUSTOMSSecond RespondentAND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRYFOR CULTURE AND HERITAGEThird RespondentCourt: Elias CJ, Glazebrook and Ellen France JJCounsel: D M Salmon, D A C Bullock and H A T Bush for the ApplicantJ K Gorman and H T N Fong for the First andSecond RespondentsB R Arapere for the Third RespondentJudgment: 19 April 2018JUDGMENT OF THE COURTA Leave to appeal is granted (Northland EnvironmentalProtection Society Incorporated v Chief Executive of theMinistry for Primary Industries [2017] NZCA 607).B The approved questions are:(a) Was the Court of Appeal correct in itsinterpretation of "finished or manufacturedindigenous timber product" and the effect ofthe export restrictions in s 67C of the ForestsAct 1949?(b) Was the Court of Appeal correct to hold thatsome or all swamp kauri is not a "protectedNew Zealand object" as defined in s 2(1) of theProtected Objects Act 1975?____________________________________________________________________Solicitors:Lee Salmon Long, Auckland for ApplicantCrown Law Office, Wellington for Respondents