SHARK EXPERIENCE LIMITED v PAUAMAC5 INCORPORATED [2018] NZSC 121

SHARK EXPERIENCE LIMITED v PAUAMAC5 INCORPORATED [2018] NZSC 121

The Supreme Court granted an extension of time and leave to appeal because the question whether shark cage diving constitutes an offence under s63A of the Wildlife Act 1953 raises an arguable point of law of public and legal importance warranting further appellate consideration of the Court of Appeal's interpretation.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] NZSC 121
Parties
Applicant: Shark Experience Limited; First Respondent: PauaMAC5 Incorporated; Second Respondent: Director-General of Conservation; Third Respondent: Shark Experience Limited
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
11 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal; Extension and Leave Granted
Outcome
Extension of time granted; leave to appeal to the Supreme Court granted on an approved ground
Legal Topics
Wildlife Act 1953 S63 a, Shark Cage Diving, Statutory Interpretation, Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal
Wildlife Law Criminal Law Environmental Law Administrative Law Appellate Procedure Wildlife Act 1953 S63 a Shark Cage Diving Statutory Interpretation +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shark Experience Limited

Applicant

PauaMAC5 Incorporated

First Respondent

Director-General of Conservation

Second Respondent

Shark Experience Limited

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal; Extension and Leave Granted

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to hold shark cage diving is an offence under s63A of the Wildlife Act 1953
  2. 2 Whether an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal should be granted
  3. 3 Whether the point raised is of sufficient public and legal importance to justify leave

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court granted an extension of time and leave to appeal because the question whether shark cage diving constitutes an offence under s63A of the Wildlife Act 1953 raises an arguable point of law of public and legal importance warranting further appellate consideration of the Court of Appeal's interpretation.

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted; leave to appeal to the Supreme Court granted on an approved ground

Orders

  • Extension of time is granted.
  • Leave to appeal is granted (PauaMAC5 v Director-General of Conservation [2018] NZCA 328).