NZ Pork Industry Board v Director General

Case [2013] NZSC 53


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
SC 36/2013
[2013] NZSC 53
BETWEEN

THE NEW ZEALAND PORK INDUSTRY BOARD
Applicant

AND

THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF THE MINISTRY OF PRIMARY INDUSTRIES
First Respondent

AND

THE CHIEF TECHNICAL OFFICER AND BIOSECURITY NEW ZEALAND
Second Respondent

Court:

Elias CJ, McGrath, William Young and Glazebrook JJ

Counsel:

F M R Cooke QC and J B Kaye for Applicant
C R Gwyn and K M Muller for Respondents

Judgment:

31 May 2013

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT GRANTING INTERIM RELIEF

Pending the determination of the appeal or sooner order of the Court, nothing is to be done by the Director-General in reliance on the health standards in issue.
____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

There is scope for argument as to the relevant status quo (given that the last interim order lapsed in early April).  As well, the appeal rights of the appellant would not be rendered nugatory by a refusal of the order.  Nonetheless, it can be said that the making of the order is necessary to preserve the position of the appellant (which is that pending further statutory processes, pork from countries affected by PRRS should not be imported).  Given this, and allowing for the imminence of the fixture and the fact that pork products have not yet been imported into New Zealand pursuant to the disputed import health standards, we consider it appropriate to make the order sought.

Solicitors:
Jonathan Kaye Law, Wellington for Applicant
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondents

Details
AGLC
NZ Pork Industry Board v Director General [2013] NZSC 53
Case
[2013] NZSC 53
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of NZ Pork Industry Board v Director General involved a dispute between the New Zealand Pork Industry Board and the Director-General of the Ministry of Primary Industries, with the Chief Technical Officer and Biosecurity New Zealand also being a respondent. The matter was brought before the Supreme Court of New Zealand, with the justices involved being Elias CJ, McGrath, William Young and Glazebrook JJ. The primary issue at hand was the legal standing of the New Zealand Pork Industry Board to seek judicial review of the Director-General’s decisions regarding the importation of pork from countries affected by Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS). The applicants sought to challenge the import health standards that allowed for the importation of pork products from these countries, arguing that these standards were insufficient to prevent the introduction of PRRS into New Zealand.

The court considered whether the New Zealand Pork Industry Board had sufficient legal standing to bring the action and whether there were any grounds for granting interim relief. The court noted that the applicants had a direct interest in the matter, as the importation of pork products from PRRS-affected countries could potentially harm the domestic pork industry. The court also highlighted that the appeal rights of the applicants would not be rendered nugatory by a refusal of the order. Furthermore, the court found that making the order was necessary to preserve the position of the applicants, which was that, pending further statutory processes, pork from countries affected by PRRS should not be imported. Given these factors, the court considered it appropriate to make the order sought by the applicants.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court granted the interim relief sought by the New Zealand Pork Industry Board, ordering that nothing be done by the Director-General in reliance on the health standards in issue until the determination of the appeal. This decision was based on the need to preserve the applicants' position and to prevent any potential harm to the domestic pork industry from the importation of pork products from PRRS-affected countries. The court's decision provides a temporary reprieve for the applicants, allowing them to continue their efforts to challenge the import health standards through the judicial review process.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.