Insurance Council of NZ Incorporated v Christchurch City Council

The High Court of New Zealand considered the application of the Insurance Council of NZ Incorporated against the Christchurch City Council and others for a declaration concerning the City Council’s Earthquake-Prone, Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy 2010. The primary dispute centred on the extent of the City Council's authority under the Building Act 2004 to mandate building owners to enhance the seismic strength of earthquake-prone buildings. The case also involved the University of Canterbury and Body Corporate 423446 (Oxford Body Corporate) as respondents.

The legal issues before the court involved determining the appropriate scope of the City Council's powers under section 124 of the Building Act 2004. Specifically, the court had to address whether the City Council could require building owners to increase seismic strength beyond what was necessary to prevent the building's ultimate capacity from being exceeded in a moderate earthquake. Additionally, the court needed to decide whether the City Council could mandate work to reduce or remove specific vulnerabilities that could cause injury, death, or property damage.

The court ruled that the City Council could not require building owners to increase the seismic strength of buildings beyond the level necessary to ensure that the building would not exceed its ultimate capacity in a moderate earthquake. The court agreed with the Insurance Council's proposed declaration that set these limitations. Regarding the City Council's authority to mandate work to reduce specific vulnerabilities, the court found that such a declaration was appropriate as it reflected a conclusion reached in the judgment and confirmed the power of territorial authorities to issue targeted notices under section 124 of the Building Act 2004. Costs were assessed, with a reduction of 50% due to the significant public interest involved in the matter.