Re Taueki (Ngāti Tamarangi) - [2025] NZHC 1488

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA

TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA ROHE

CIV-2017-485-160; CIV-2017-485-214 CIV-2017-485-229; CIV-2017-485-273 CIV-2017-485-511; CIV-2017-485-261

CIV-2017-485-248

Group N, STAGE 1(a) [2025] NZHC 1488

UNDER the Marine and Coastal Area (Takukai Moana Act) 2011

IN THE MATTER

of applications for orders recognising Customary Marine Title and Protected Customary Rights

BY

Continued…

Hearing:
13 May 2024 – 27 June 2024

29 October 2024 – 8 November 2024
Final submissions: 7 February 2025

Appearances:

A K Irwin and O T H Neas for Ngāti Tamarangi hapū of Muaūpoko iwi

No appearance for Margaret Morgan-Allen for David Morgan Whānau
N R Coates, P Walker and T I M Hautapu for Ngāti Raukawa ki te Tonga

B R Lyall, M R G van Alphen Fyfe and H L B Swedlund for Patrick Seymour on behalf of Te Whānau Tima (Seymour) and Ngā Ahi Kā o Te Hapū o Te Mateawa

Continued….

Judgment:
Reissued:
13 June 2025

9 June 2025

JUDGMENT OF GRICE J

(Applications for Customary Marine Title)

RE TAUEKI (NGĀTI TAMARANGI) & ORS [2025] NZHC 1488 [9 June 2025]

Appearances: C Shenton (self-represented) for Te Rūnanga o Ngā Wairiki Ngāti Ap
T H Bennion, E A Whiley and Kudrat for Muaūpoko Tribal Authority Incorporated
A M Cameron, T N Ahu and A J Samuels for Te Āti Awa ki Whakarongotai Charitable Trust
E K Rongo and Z JMPNR Tait for Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira Incorporated
D A Ward, D O Kleinsman and A H Ou for Attorney General
F R Wedde and C E Bulow for Manawatū-Whanganui Regional Council, Wellington Regional Council and Kāpiti Coast District Council
L L Black for Te Patutokotoko
C F Finlayson KC and D E Parfitt for Rangitāne o Manawatū Settlement Trust
B A Scott, T D Smith and R J J Wales for Seafood Industry Representatives
C M Hockly for Horowhenua 11 (Part) Reservation Trust

BY William James Taueki on behalf of Ngāti Tamarangi hapū of Muaūpoko iwi (CIV- 2017-485-160)

BY Margaret Morgan-Allen for David Morgan Whānau (CIV-2017-485-214)

BY Rachael Ann Selby on behalf of Ngāti Raukawa ki te Tonga
(CIV-2017-485-229)

BY Patrick Seymour on behalf of Te Whānau Tima (Seymour) and Ngā Ahi Kā o Te Hapū o Te Mateawa (CIV-2017-485-273)

BY
Chris Shenton on behalf of Te Rūnanga o Ngā Wairiki Ngāti Apa

(CIV-2017-485-511)

BY
Muaūpoko represented by Muaūpoko Tribal Authority Incorporated

(CIV-2017-485-261)

BY Trustees of Te Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai Charitable Trust on behalf of Te Āti Awa ki Whakarongotai (CIV-2017-485-248)

INTERESTED

PARTIES

Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira Incorporated

on behalf of the iwi of Ngāti Toa Rangatira (Crown engagement) MAC-01-12-021

Attorney-General

Manawatū-Whanganui Regional Council, Wellington Regional Council and Kāpiti Coast District Council

Te Patutokotoko represented by Christopher Henare Tahana, Edward (Fred) Clark, Hayden Tūroa, and Novena McGuckin (CIV-2017-485-254)

(Intervener)

Rangitāne o Manawatū Settlement Trust (applied)

Seafood Industry Representatives

Horowhenua 11 (Part) Reservation Trust

Table of Contents

WHAKATAKINGA | INTRODUCTION [1]
The applicants and interested parties [6]
The application area — features of the Kapiti Coast…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Re Taueki (Ngāti Tamarangi) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] NZHC 1488
Decision Date: 9 June 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This case involved multiple applications under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 by various iwi, hapū, and whānau groups for the recognition of customary marine title (CMT) in the common marine and coastal area, referred to as the takutai moana, of the Kapiti Coast. The applications were heard by Grice J, who issued a detailed judgment considering the historical context, tikanga Māori principles, and the statutory test for CMT as recently reformulated by the Supreme Court in Re Edwards. The judgment recognised that five applicant groups were entitled to either shared exclusive or exclusive CMT at various specific locations across the hearing area.

The legal issues addressed in the judgment included the interpretation of the statutory test for CMT, the burden of proof on the applicants, the significance of third-party use and occupation of the takutai moana, and the relevance of historical events and relationships between the iwi and the takutai moana. The Court considered extensive evidence from witnesses, including tikanga experts, and the reports of two pūkenga appointed to assist the Court.

The Court's reasoning focused on whether each applicant group held the specified area in accordance with tikanga, had exclusively used and occupied it from 1840 to the present day without substantial interruption, and whether the CMT had been extinguished. The judgment recognised that tikanga Māori principles, such as whakapapa, mana, tapu, and kaitiakitanga, were central to the consideration of the claims. The Court also considered the impact of third-party use and occupation, the significance of historical events, and the relevance of the Treaty of Waitangi/te Tiriti o Waitangi.

The outcome of the judgment was that five applicant groups were granted recognition of CMT in specific areas of the takutai moana. The final orders recognised the CMT of Ngāti Raukawa ki te Tonga, Te Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai, Muaūpoko, Te Whānau Tima (Seymour), and Ngāti Tamarangi hapū of Muaūpoko iwi. The judgment also addressed issues of shared exclusivity and overlapping claims, providing a detailed analysis of the relationships between the iwi and the takutai moana.

Orders