Estate of Ruru v Attorney-General

The Court of Appeal considered three appeals concerning the interpretation and application of the resumption provisions in the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 (TOWA). The appeals involved the interpretation and application of s 8HB of the TOWA, which provides for the resumption of land in certain circumstances. The Court was required to determine whether the Waitangi Tribunal correctly interpreted and applied the resumption provisions, the provisions concerning compensation, interest rates, and the terms and conditions for resumption, and whether the High Court correctly dismissed the judicial review applications. The Court held that the Tribunal had misinterpreted and misapplied the resumption provisions, resulting in the Court allowing the appeal in CA150/2023 and dismissing the appeals in CA149/2023 and CA151/2023. The Court found that the Tribunal's broad interpretation of the resumption provisions was inconsistent with the text, purpose, and context of the provisions. The Court directed the Tribunal to reconsider its decisions in light of this judgment. The Court also ordered the first and second appellants in CA149/2023 to pay the Attorney-General one set of costs for a standard appeal on a band B basis, and the appellant in CA151/2023 to pay the third and sixth respondents in CA151/2023 costs for a standard appeal on a band B basis.