21 Aug 2015
NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY v ARCHITECTURAL CENTRE INC & ORS [2015] NZHC 1991 [21 August 2015]
- Citation
- (2015) 19 ELRNZ 163
- Court
- High Court
The Board did not err in law: s 171(1) requires particular regard to listed matters subject to Part 2 but does not convert those matters into automatic primacy; the 2003 drafting change did not alter Part 2's role; King Salmon does not displace Part 2's relevance to s 171 determinations; the Board's findings about inadequacy of alternatives, need for transparency in weighting where outcomes are sensitive, limited weight to enabling benefits, transport modelling caution, and heritage/amenity conclusions were lawful evaluative judgments supported by evidence and not contrary to law.