19 Apr 2023
The appeal is dismissed because Watercare's ability to refuse to accept vesting of the watermain did not derive from the 2015 Bylaw or its reference to Watercare's codes of practice; codes of practice were not legislative instruments or unlawful sub‑delegations and references to technical standards in the bylaw were lawful and did not render the bylaw invalid or uncertain.
16 May 2022
The short, adequately explained delay that caused no prejudice and during which amended grounds were filed satisfied the Almond v Read factors, so an extension under r 43(2) was granted; costs were refused on balance despite respondents' conditional opposition.
19 Mar 2018
Threshold was established (reason to believe Association could not pay costs). Exercising the r 5.45 discretion, the Court ordered security because the Association, an incorporated society representing members with personal financial interests in moorings and without evidence that security would stifle proceedings, did not present public interest grounds sufficient to outweigh defendant's entitlement; the Association's claims were arguable but not so meritorious as to preclude security; the appropriate quantum was fixed at a discounted sum of $60,000 to reflect scale calculations; and the pro…
25 Aug 2014
Court held the Freedom Camping Bylaw as made on 14 December 2011 was valid: the Council reasonably satisfied itself of s11(2) requirements (necessity, appropriateness/proportionality and NZBORA consistency) and any limitation on s18 NZBORA was justified under s5; the Council's resolutions of 13 March and 27 November 2013 purporting to amend Schedules A and B were unlawful for failure to use the required special consultative procedure and those amendments were severed and quashed; Clauses 203.5 and 2003.5 of the Consolidated Bylaw are to be revoked via proper statutory steps and are not to be…
21 Apr 2008
Given the statutory framework in s10(4) of the Dog Control Act and the evidence of dog-related incidents and risks, the Auckland City Council's Dog Control Bylaw was a reasonable, proportionate, and necessary response to protect public safety; the Court therefore dismissed the plaintiff's challenge and upheld the Bylaw.
26 Sept 2007
Paper (including cardboard) acquired by contract from its lawful owner is not 'waste' under the Local Government Act 1974 and the Local Government Act 2002 because it has not been abandoned by its former owner; consequently bylaws requiring licensing of collection and transportation of such contract-acquired paper are ultra vires and invalid.
26 Sept 2007
Materials consisting of used and unwanted paper and cardboard that Carter Holt Harvey acquires by contract from their owners are not "waste" for the purposes of Part 31 LGA 1974 and s145 LGA 2002; consequently bylaws requiring licensing of collection and transportation of those materials are ultra vires and invalid insofar as they apply to such contractually acquired materials.
31 Mar 2006
The Court held the challenged waste levy bylaws constituted taxes which Parliament had not authorised by clear words or necessary implication in the empowering statutes; therefore the levies (Rodney cl 110(1)(f), North Shore cl 4.111(1)(f), Waitakere cl 111(1)(f) and Christchurch cl 4.2(d)) were ultra vires and invalid, whereas licensing bylaws regulating commercial collection and transportation of waste (including recyclable material) were within the scope of Part XXXI and valid; recyclable material acquired for recycling falls within the statutory meaning of 'waste'.
14 Mar 2006
The Brothels Bylaw was quashed because, construed and applied, it produced a de facto prohibition of brothels (including small owner‑operated brothels) across substantial parts of the Auckland Isthmus and Central Area, thereby exceeding the delegated power in s14 and conflicting with the purposes of the Prostitution Reform Act 2003; the dispensation decision refusing Club 574 relief was irrational on the evidence and is set aside.
18 Feb 2004
Because established authorities confirm that New Zealand courts have universal summary criminal jurisdiction, local authorities may validly make bylaws under statutory power, and neither the Treaty of Waitangi nor the Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 confers a separate jurisdiction or immunity, the application did not raise an arguable question of law and special leave to appeal was refused.