31 Oct 2007
COROMANDEL WATCHDOG OF HAURAKI INCORPORATED V CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ANOR CA CA285/05
- Citation
- openlaw-061466cb_9a9b_4d28_a41f_f23bd8dd3500.pdf
- Court
- Court of Appeal
Prohibited activity status is not confined to cases where an activity is absolutely forbidden for the life of the plan; a planning authority must determine under s32 whether prohibited status is the most appropriate classification, including where a precautionary, staged or resource‑allocation approach is justified; the High Court's restrictive gloss was rejected and the question answered in the affirmative, with remittal for reconsideration.