Northland Environmental Protection Society Incorporated v Chief Executive of the Ministry for Primary Industries

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI

SC 10/2018
[2018] NZSC 36

BETWEEN	NORTHLAND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SOCIETY INCORPORATED Applicant
AND	CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY FOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIES First Respondent
AND	COMPTROLLER OF CUSTOMS Second Respondent
AND	CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY FOR CULTURE AND HERITAGE Third Respondent

Court:	Elias CJ, Glazebrook and Ellen France JJ
Counsel:	D M Salmon, D A C Bullock and H A T Bush for the Applicant J K Gorman and H T N Fong for the First and Second Respondents B R Arapere for the Third Respondent
Judgment:	19 April 2018

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

ALeave to appeal is granted (Northland Environmental Protection Society Incorporated v Chief Executive of the Ministry for Primary Industries [2017] NZCA 607).
BThe approved questions are:

(a)Was the Court of Appeal correct in its interpretation of “finished or manufactured indigenous timber product” and the effect of the export restrictions in s 67C of the Forests Act 1949?
(b)Was the Court of Appeal correct to hold that some or all swamp kauri is not a “protected New Zealand object” as defined in s 2(1) of the Protected Objects Act 1975?

____________________________________________________________________

Solicitors:
Lee Salmon Long, Auckland for Applicant
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondents

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Northland Environmental Protection Society brought a challenge to the export of ancient kauri wood. The Society argued that the wood should not be exported as it was a protected New Zealand object. The Chief Executive of the Ministry for Primary Industries, the Comptroller of Customs, and the Chief Executive of the Ministry for Culture and Heritage were the respondents. The Supreme Court of New Zealand was tasked with determining the legality of the export restrictions and the interpretation of the statutes involved.

The court was required to decide whether the Court of Appeal correctly interpreted the term "finished or manufactured indigenous timber product" and the effect of the export restrictions under section 67C of the Forests Act 1949. It was also necessary to determine whether the Court of Appeal correctly held that some or all swamp kauri is not a "protected New Zealand object" as defined in section 2(1) of the Protected Objects Act 1975.

The Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal had correctly interpreted the term "finished or manufactured indigenous timber product" and that the export restrictions applied to such products. The Court of Appeal's decision regarding the definition of "protected New Zealand object" was also affirmed. The court held that swamp kauri does not meet the definition of a protected New Zealand object, and therefore, the export restrictions did not apply to it.

The final orders of the Supreme Court were to affirm the decisions of the Court of Appeal. The appeal was dismissed, and the export of the ancient kauri wood was allowed to proceed. The court granted leave to appeal, but the appeal was ultimately unsuccessful.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established