Southern Clams Limited v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Fisheries

Southern Clams Limited challenged the decision of the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Fisheries to refuse their application for a special permit for commercial fishing. The application was refused on the basis that the Ministry had not made an administrative error that required correction. The court had to determine whether the Ministry had erred in deciding that the application did not meet the criteria for a special permit under the Fisheries Act 1996. The court also had to determine whether the Ministry had properly exercised its discretion in refusing the application. The court found that the Ministry had not erred in deciding that the application did not meet the criteria for a special permit. The court held that the term "administrative error" in the context of the Fisheries Act 1996 referred to clerical errors or oversights, and not errors of law. The court also found that the Ministry had properly exercised its discretion in refusing the application. The court held that the Ministry's decision was not unreasonable or irrational, and was supported by the evidence and the relevant legislation.

The court also noted that the Ministry's decision was based on the fact that the decisions to decline Westhaven's applications for cockle permits in new areas were intentional, and not due to any administrative errors. The court held that the Ministry's reasoning was consistent with the purpose of the special permit, which was to allow administrative errors by the Ministry which result in the loss of access or disadvantage to client fishing operations to be corrected. The court also noted that the Ministry had not communicated the approved purposes of the special permit to the industry, which was unfortunate. However, the court held that this did not affect the validity of the Ministry's decision, as the approval had legal effect under the Fisheries Act 1996 and should be readily available to the industry.