Auckland Council v Woolworths New Zealand Ltd

Auckland Council was the appellant in the case before the High Court, with Woolworths New Zealand Ltd being the respondent. The dispute centred on the interpretation of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (NZ), specifically sections 83, 85, and 205, in relation to the judicial review of decisions made by the Alcohol Regulatory Licensing Authority (ARLA) concerning local alcohol policies. The Auckland Council had challenged ARLA's decision to uphold certain elements of a draft local alcohol policy, arguing these elements were unreasonable in light of the Act's objectives.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether ARLA's decision to maintain certain elements of a provisional local alcohol policy was subject to judicial review, and if so, what the implications of such a review were. Specifically, the court had to determine the extent to which ARLA's decisions could be reviewed and the consequences of a successful judicial review on the policy elements in question. The case also involved interpreting the statutory framework governing local alcohol policies, including the scope of ARLA's jurisdiction and the limits of judicial review under the Act.

The High Court held that judicial review was indeed available under the Act, as specified in section 83, which clarified that the prohibition on appeals does not preclude judicial review. However, the court emphasised that judicial review was distinct from an appeal under section 85, which mandates specific actions by the territorial authority if the High Court overturns ARLA’s decision. The court clarified that when the High Court overturns ARLA’s decision, it is ARLA, not the territorial authority, that must reconsider the policy element. The court found that ARLA’s decision-making process must align with the Act’s objectives and that ARLA was required to evaluate the reasonableness of policy elements independently, taking into account the Act’s object and community preferences.

The court ordered that ARLA reconsider the elements of the draft local alcohol policy in light of the statutory requirements and the principles of reasonableness as interpreted in the judgment. The Auckland Council was not required to revise the policy elements as it would have been under a section 85 appeal; instead, the onus was on ARLA to reassess the policy elements in accordance with the court's directions.