Safe Water Alternative New Zealand Incorporated v Hamilton City Council

Safe Water Alternative New Zealand Incorporated has brought a claim against the Hamilton City Council for judicial review of its decision to recommence fluoridation of the City's water supply. Safe Water claims the Council was required to carry out a special consultation procedure before making its decision to resume fluoridation, and failed to do that. Secondly, that the Council failed to have regard to the reasons why it decided to stop fluoridating water in June 2013. Safe Water now applies for interim relief under s 8 of the Judicature Amendment Act 1972 to prevent the Council from recommencing the addition of fluoride to the Hamilton water supply until its substantive claim for judicial review is decided. The Council opposes Safe Water's application for interim relief. The Court held that there was a real contest between the parties and that interim relief was not necessary to preserve Safe Water's position. The Court found that Safe Water's position, the protection of which it is now considering, is simply a right to due process. The literal invisibility and indetectability of fluoride means that Safe Water's rights to due process cannot materially be impaired by recommencement of fluoridation in accordance with the March 2014 decision. It is not a case where the Council will steal a tangible march by implementing a decision now challenged in these proceedings. Safe Water's application for interim relief is dismissed. The case can and should now proceed to a substantive determination.