EASTON V WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL HC WN CIV-2010-485-678

EASTON V WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL HC WN CIV-2010-485-678

The Appeal Proceedings were struck out because s336(5) gives finality to the Environment Court's decision and there is no right of appeal; the Second Review (judicial review) was struck out because s296 RMA bars High Court review where an appeal right existed and Mr Easton did not exercise that right (he only gave s291(4) notice and acted as a representative), and, alternatively, even if not barred the interim relief would have been refused and security for costs granted.

Citation
openlaw-f7e57b65_ae9b_4c5e_9f6f_118df644a616.pdf
Parties
Appellant/applicant: Benjamin Morland Easton; Respondent/second Respondent: Wellington City Council; First Respondent: The Wellington Mayor; Third Respondent: Opus International Consultants; Appellant (environment Court): The City is Ours (incorporated society)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
29 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Judicial Review (challenge to Revocation of Pedestrian Mall Status) / Decision on Interlocutory Applications (strike Out, Stay, Security for Costs, Interim Relief)
Outcome
Both the Appeal Proceedings (notice of appeal against Environment Court decision) and the Second Review Proceedings (judicial review) are struck out
Legal Topics
Standing, Finality of Environment Court Decisions, S296 RMA Bar to Review, Interim Injunctions, Security for Costs, Abuse of Process, Conflict of Interest
Resource Management Act Local Government Act Administrative Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review Standing Finality of Environment Court Decisions S296 RMA Bar to Review +4 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin Morland Easton

Appellant/applicant

Wellington City Council

Respondent/second Respondent

The Wellington Mayor

First Respondent

Opus International Consultants

Third Respondent

The City is Ours (incorporated society)

Appellant (environment Court)

Procedural Posture

Appeal and Judicial Review (challenge to Revocation of Pedestrian Mall Status) / Decision on Interlocutory Applications (strike Out, Stay, Security for Costs, Interim Relief)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is any right of appeal from the Environment Court decision (s336 LGA)
  2. 2 Whether s296 RMA bars High Court judicial review where a right of appeal existed and was not exercised
  3. 3 Whether applicant had standing to bring the Second Review Proceedings having only given notice under s291(4) and not been a s274 party

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Proceedings were struck out because s336(5) gives finality to the Environment Court's decision and there is no right of appeal; the Second Review (judicial review) was struck out because s296 RMA bars High Court review where an appeal right existed and Mr Easton did not exercise that right (he only gave s291(4) notice and acted as a representative), and, alternatively, even if not barred the interim relief would have been refused and security for costs granted.

Court Disposition

Both the Appeal Proceedings (notice of appeal against Environment Court decision) and the Second Review Proceedings (judicial review) are struck out

Orders

  • Appeal Proceedings (CIV-2010-485-678) struck out pursuant to Local Government Act 1974 s336 finality
  • Second Review Proceedings (CIV-2010-485-748) struck out pursuant to Resource Management Act 1991 s296 (failure to exercise appeal right)