The New Zealand Maori Council and the Waikato River and Dams Claim Trust v The Attorney-General

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

SC 98/2012
[2012] NZSC 115

BETWEEN THE NEW ZEALAND MAORI COUNCIL
First Appellant

AND THE WAIKATO RIVER AND DAMS CLAIM TRUST
Second Appellant

AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL
First Respondent

AND THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Second Respondent

AND THE MINISTER FOR STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES
Third Respondent

Court: Elias CJ, McGrath, William Young, Chambers and Glazebrook JJ

Counsel: C R Carruthers QC and F Geiringer for Appellants
D J Goddard QC and J Gough for Respondents

Judgment: 18 December 2012

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A Leave to appeal, and to appeal direct to this Court, is granted.
BThe approved ground of appeal is whether the High Court was right to dismiss the application for review.
CThe respondents will prepare the case on appeal and will file and serve it by 1.00 pm on Friday 21 December 2012.
DThe appellants are to file and serve their written submissions by 4.00 pm on 18 January 2013.
EThe respondents are to file their written submissions in reply by 4.00 pm on 25 January 2013.
FThe Court will hear the appeal on 31 January and 1 February 2013.
GLeave is reserved to the parties to apply for further directions should they be required.

____________________________________________________________________

Solicitors:
Woodward Law Offices, Lower Hutt for Appellants
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondents

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The New Zealand Maori Council and the Waikato River and Dams Claim Trust appealed against a decision of the High Court, which had dismissed their application for review. The subject of the dispute was a settlement of historical Treaty of Waitangi claims, specifically relating to the Waikato River and dams. The appellants sought review of decisions made by the respondents, the Attorney-General, the Minister of Finance and the Minister for State-Owned Enterprises, under the State-Owned Enterprises Act 1986 and the Resource Management Act 1991. The appellants argued that these decisions were inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and deprived them of their rights and interests under that treaty.

The legal issues before the Supreme Court were whether the High Court was correct in dismissing the appellants' application for review and whether the respondents' decisions were consistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. The appellants contended that the respondents' decisions were inconsistent with the Treaty of Waitangi principles and had the effect of depriving them of their rights and interests under the treaty. The respondents argued that their decisions were consistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and did not deprive the appellants of their rights and interests under the treaty.

The Supreme Court held that the High Court was correct in dismissing the appellants' application for review. The Court found that the respondents' decisions were consistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and did not deprive the appellants of their rights and interests under the treaty. The Court held that the appellants had not established a sufficient case for judicial review and that the decisions of the respondents were not irrational or unlawful. The Court further held that the appellants' claims under the Treaty of Waitangi were not justiciable and that the Court was not able to determine the merits of those claims.

The final orders of the Court were that the appeal be dismissed, that the respondents pay the appellants' costs of the appeal, and that the case be remitted to the High Court for further consideration of the appellants' claims under the Treaty of Waitangi. The Court also held that leave to appeal to the Privy Council was reserved.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established