New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Precedent and plan integrity

Legal area

Court

6 Sept 2023

AUCKLAND COUNCIL v MATVIN GROUP LIMITED [2023] NZHC 2481

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2481
Court

High Court

The Panel erred in law by misinterpreting the FUZ as permitting urban development that undermines the holding and transitional purpose of the zone; large-scale urbanisation with more than minor effects is contrary to the FUZ objectives and policies and therefore fails the policy gateway of s 104D(1)(b); accordingly the Panel's decision of 29 March 2023 is quashed and the matter is remitted to the Expert Consenting Panel for reconsideration.
8 May 2008

ARC V ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF AUCK HC AK CIV 2007-404-002019

Citation

openlaw-79bb3990_e9f1_4379_8beb_1bc4ace3f7c3.pdf
Court

High Court

The High Court dismissed the appeal: the Environment Court did not err in law. In a resource consent hearing inconsistency between a Regional Policy Statement and a District Plan is to be treated as a factor under s104 (not as a s75 remaking exercise) and the Environment Court was entitled to give substantial weight to the Policy Statement while still balancing all s104 matters. On remittal the Environment Court was confined to fresh consideration of the matters identified by the High Court using the evidence before it and was not obliged to admit evidence of plan changes notified after the f…
26 Jun 2007

ARC V LIVING EARTH LTD HC AK CIV-2006-404-006659

Citation

openlaw-c55d7b20_5e99_4591_ab66_95fdd21e7152.pdf
Court

High Court

The High Court held the Environment Court did not commit material error of law. The Environment Court properly had regard to the ARPS and its strategic direction, properly applied the statutory permitted baseline under s104(2), adequately considered Proposed Change 6, and reasonably exercised its discretion on precedent and plan integrity given the proposal's unusual characteristics and limited 10-year term; therefore the Environment Court's grant of consents to Living Earth stands and the appeal is dismissed.

New Zealand Case Law

AUCKLAND COUNCIL v MATVIN GROUP LIMITED [2023] NZHC 2481

ARC V ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF AUCK HC AK CIV 2007-404-002019

ARC V LIVING EARTH LTD HC AK CIV-2006-404-006659