WAITAKERE CITY COUNCIL V ESTATE HOMES LIMITED SC 73/2005
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and approved specific grounds for appeal to resolve whether compensation and the contested consent condition should be treated as a taking or as a condition, whether that condition meets the Newbury test, the proper characterization of formation and vesting under s108(2)(c)...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- WAITAKERE CITY COUNCIL V ESTATE HOMES LIMITED SC 73/2005
- Parties
- Appellant: Waitakere City Council; Respondent: Estate Homes Limited
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 4 April 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal to the Supreme Court / Leave to Appeal Granted; Judgment Delivered 4 April 2006
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted and grounds of appeal approved for substantive determination
- Legal Topics
- Compensation for Planning Conditions, Validity of Conditions (newbury Test), Interpretation of S108(2)(c) RMA, Formation and Vesting of Roads, Procedural Powers Under Rule 718 a
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Waitakere City Council
Appellant
Estate Homes Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal to the Supreme Court / Leave to Appeal Granted; Judgment Delivered 4 April 2006
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether compensation should be assessed as if the land had been taken or as an ingredient of a condition imposed on a resource consent and the consequential effect
- 2 Whether condition 2(o)(vi) satisfied the Newbury test
- 3 Whether formation and vesting of Marinich Drive constituted "services or works" under s108(2)(c) of the Resource Management Act 1991
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and approved specific grounds for appeal to resolve whether compensation and the contested consent condition should be treated as a taking or as a condition, whether that condition meets the Newbury test, the proper characterization of formation and vesting under s108(2)(c) RMA, and the scope of the High Court's powers under Rule 718A; these matters require determination on appeal.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted and grounds of appeal approved for substantive determination
Orders
- Leave to appeal granted.
- Approved grounds of appeal as listed in the judgment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
WAITAKERE CITY COUNCIL V ESTATE HOMES LIMITED SC 73/2005 4 April 2006IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 73/2005 [2006] NZSC 22BETWEEN WAITAKERE CITY COUNCIL Appellant AND ESTATE HOMES LIMITED Respondent Hearing: 3 April 2006 Court: Blanchard, Tipping and McGrath JJ Counsel: M E Casey and R B Enright for Appellant D J Neutze for Respondent Judgment: 4 April 2006JUDGMENT OF THE COURT[1] Leave to appeal is granted. [2] The approved grounds are: (1) Whether compensation should be assessed as if the land had been taken by the Council, or as an ingredient of a condition imposed on the granting of a resource consent, or otherwise; and with what consequential effect. (2) Whether condition 2(o)(vi) satisfied the requirements of the Newburytest. (3) Whether the formation and vesting of Marinich Drive constituted "services or works" under s 108(2)(c) of the Resource Management Act 1991.(4) Whether the High Court was empowered under Rule 718A to determine the nature of the road which, but for the designation, would have been appropriate; or whether it should have referred that matter back to the Environment Court.Solicitors: Kensington Swan, Auckland for Appellant Brookfields, Auckland for Respondent