Legal Research
Cases
Te Rangi v Jackson

Te Rangi v Jackson

Case [2015] NZCA 490 19 October 2015

Judicial Review

Natural Justice & Procedural Fairness

Statutory Interpretation

Administrative Law

Type to search within this case.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA745/2014
[2015] NZCA 490

BETWEEN	TAME TE RANGI & ORS Appellants
AND	WILLIAM WAKATERE JACKSON Respondent

Hearing:	15 September 2015
Court:	Randerson, Harrison and Wild JJ
Counsel:	P F Majurey and P R H Mason for Appellants T T R Williams and I F F Peters for Respondent
Judgment:	19 October 2015 at 2.15 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe appeal is dismissed.
BThe appellants are ordered to pay the respondent costs for a standard appeal on a band A basis together with usual disbursements.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Harrison J)

Introduction

The Independent Māori Statutory Board is a body established by the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (the Act). One of the Board’s primary purposes is to assist the Auckland Council by promoting issues of cultural, economic, environmental and social significance for two defined groups.[1] One is mana whenua – those who are affiliated with an Auckland based iwi or hapu. The other is mataawaka – those who do not enjoy such an affiliation, being Maori who live in Auckland and who are not in a mana whenua group.
[1]Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, s 81.
The Board must consist of seven manawhenua representatives and two mataawaka representatives.[2] They are appointed for a three year local government term by a selection body comprising 19 members who represent separate mana whenua groups.[3] The selection body’s sole function is to make these appointments. In discharging this duty it “must be guided only by the Board’s purpose, function and powers”.[4]
[2]Schedule 2, clause 1.
[3]Schedule 2, clause 2, 4 and 9(1).
[4]Schedule 2, clause 2(4).
The issue arising on this appeal is whether the selection body followed the correct statutory process when appointing Messrs John Tamihere and Tony Kake as the Board’s two mataawaka representatives for the 2013 local government election. An unsuccessful candidate for mataawaka selection, William Jackson, sought judicial review in the High Court of the selection body’s appointment of Mr Kake, but not of Mr Tamihere. Duffy J found that the selection body acted unlawfully in appointing Mr Kake and set his appointment aside.[5] The selection body now appeals.

Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009

[5]Jackson v Te Rangi [2014] NZHC 2918.

Clause 6 of Schedule 2 prescribes this process which the selection body must follow when appointing mataawaka representatives:
6 Selection body chooses mataawaka representatives for board
(1)The selection body must choose the board's 2 mataawaka representatives.
(2)The selection body must choose the mataawaka representatives by following a process that, at a minimum,—
(a)includes public notification of the process that the body proposes to use for choosing the representatives; and
(b)provides an opportunity for nominations to be received; and
(c)requires the body to take into account the views of mataawaka when choosing the representatives.
(3)The selection body must apply clause 5 when choosing the 2 mataawaka representatives.
(Emphasis added).

Background

The selection body appointed for the 2010 local body election chose Messrs…

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.

Continue reading Te Rangi v Jackson

Details

AGLC: Te Rangi v Jackson [2015] NZCA 490
Case: [2015] NZCA 490
Decision Date: 19 October 2015 at 2.15 pm

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the New Zealand Court of Appeal case of Te Rangi v Jackson, the appellants, Tame Te Rangi and others, challenged the decision of the selection body, which was appointed to choose mataawaka representatives for the Independent Māori Statutory Board. The respondent, William Wakatere Jackson, an unsuccessful candidate for the mataawaka selection, sought judicial review in the High Court of the selection body's appointment of Mr. Tony Kake, but not of Mr. John Tamihere. The issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the selection body followed the correct statutory process when appointing Mr. Kake and Mr. Tamihere as the Board's two mataawaka representatives for the 2013 local government election.

The Court of Appeal held that the selection body did not follow the correct statutory process in appointing Mr. Kake and Mr. Tamihere. The Court found that the selection body failed to take account of mataawaka views, as required by the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009. Moreover, the selection body did not act as a body when making its appointments, as it used a secret ballot process without any collective discussion beforehand. As a result, the Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the High Court's decision to set aside Mr. Kake's appointment. However, Mr. Tamihere's appointment was not set aside due to procedural issues in the High Court proceedings.

The Court of Appeal also found that the selection body's failure to take account of mataawaka views was not remedied by the availability of information sheets, the names of those who nominated individual candidates, reminders from the chair about statutory duties, and an invitation to members to discuss each candidate's merits. The Court held that the selection body should have acted as a collective entity to share the information, knowledge, and experience possessed by its individual members. This would have ensured that mataawaka views were taken into account and the selection body's decision would have been beyond challenge.

In conclusion, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and upheld the High Court's decision to set aside Mr. Kake's appointment as a mataawaka representative for the Independent Māori Statutory Board. The selection body's failure to follow the correct statutory process and act as a body when making its appointments led to the unlawful appointment of Mr. Kake. The Court also emphasised the importance of taking account of mataawaka views when selecting mataawaka representatives for the Board, as mandated by the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009.

Orders