Te Rünanga-ä-iwi-o Ngäti Kahu v Far North District Council, Carrington Farms Limited, Carrington Estate Limited, Carrington Resort Limited. - SC 66/2013

Summary

Civil Appeal – Resource Management – Resource Management Act 1991, ss 91, 94C, 104 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 94C – Whether the Court of Appeal misinterpreted the decision of the Supreme Court in Westfield (New Zealand) v North Shore City Council [2005] NZSC 17, [2005] 2 NZLR 597 – Whether the Court of Appeal incorrectly applied its decision in Queenstown Lakes District Council v Hawthorn Estates Ltd [2006] NZRMA 424 (CA) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in interpreting the settlement agreement. [2013] NZCA 221 CA 705/2011; CA 706/2011; CA 54/2012; CA 56/2012.

Result

Notice of abandonment of appeal being lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
20 January 2015.

Additional Information

Dates

Leave to appeal is granted.

The approved grounds of appeal are:

(a) In relation to the land use consent application:

(i) Whether or not “special circumstances” existed such that the Far North District Council had discretion in terms of s 94C(2) of the Resource Management Act 1991 to notify the application for the land use consent;

Whether or not the authority made a reviewable error in exercising that discretion; and

What degree of scrutiny is appropriate when reviewing non-notification decisions.

(b) In relation to the subdivision consent application, whether or not the unimplemented land use consent should have been taken into account, when determining the application for the subdivision consent, as part of:

The “environment” under s 104(1) of the Resource Management Act 1991; or

The permitted baseline under s 104(2).

2 December 2013