21 Jul 2023
The Court granted a stay because the interpretation of "effective control" is a novel question with broad industry impact, immediate execution would likely render RX8's right of appeal nugatory, and the balance of convenience and public interest in continuity of pharmacy services favoured maintaining the status quo pending appeal.
17 Aug 2017
The Court concluded the NRC's rates for the KDC region for 2011/2012–2015/2016 were unlawful and that a declaration of unlawfulness equated to invalidity; discretionary factors (delay, prejudice, gravity) did not justify withholding relief, but restitution (ordering refunds) is not appropriate in judicial review proceedings; validation under s5 or replacement under s120 were inapplicable remedies here; accordingly the Court set aside (quashed) the unlawful rates and attendant penalties retrospectively for the specified years, reserved costs.
27 Oct 2016
The appeal was allowed and the District Court costs order was quashed because the District Court judge did not have all documents filed at the time he decided costs, including the appellants' principal submissions on costs; consequently the costs order could not stand and the parties agreed there should be no further order as to costs, with security remitted to the appellants' solicitors.
3 Feb 2012
The appeal is allowed by consent: the Disciplinary Tribunal was correct that the Complaints Assessment Committee should have laid a charge rather than determining the complaint; accordingly the decision of the Committee dated 12 April 2011 is quashed and its orders are set aside.
10 Oct 2008
Procedural Direction No.21 was made in breach of the principles of natural justice (s 27 NZBORA) because it effectively prevented parties from presenting their cases (excluding them from an experts' conference and from giving evidence); accordingly those decisions were quashed and the Tribunal was directed to reconsider its procedural directions and to hear parties before making such exclusionary orders; no costs awarded against the Tribunal.
5 May 2008
The Court recalled its earlier judgment and reissued it to limit the quashing to the parts of the Ministers' decisions dealing with Scheduled Aircraft (Terminal Users), applying the Horowhenua 'very special reason' test and concluding the decisions are severable so that non-scheduled aircraft fees and overnight parking fees remain valid.