19 Aug 2011
HEYBRIDGE DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED V BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL HC TAU CIV-2010-470-585
- Citation
- openlaw-b18a2bea_0a21_4eb4_90ea_70d62496c9e8.pdf
- Court
- High Court
The High Court concluded the Environment Court erred as a matter of law by effectively imposing on the appellant an onus to disprove Pirirakau's belief that an urupa might exist on the site and by treating s6 recognition as extending to relationships founded predominantly on unproven belief; the Environment Court's refusal of consents is quashed in part and the matter is remitted for reconsideration consistent with the correct evidential approach and legal principles.