Sustain our Sounds v The New Zealand King Salmon Company Limited and others - SC 84/2013

Media releases

Summary

Civil – whether the High Court misinterpreted or misapplied policies 8, 13 and 15 of the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010 – whether the High Court erred in is assessment of the Board of Inquiries application of Brown v Dunedin City Council to a private plan for aquaculture, involving the exclusory use of public domain costal marine area.[2013] NZHC 1992   CIV 2013 406 056

Result

The application under s 149V of the Resource Management Act 1991 by Sustain Our Sounds Incorporated for leave to appeal the decision of the High Court dated is granted.  The question of law for determination on the appeal is:Was the conclusion of the Board of Inquiry that the key environmental effects of the plan change in issue would be adequately managed by the maximum feed discharge levels set in the plan and the consent conditions it proposed to impose in granting the resource consent to King Salmon one made in accordance with the Act and open to it?
18 October 2013
______________________________________________________

The appeal with regard to the Waitata, Richmond and Ngamahau sites is dismissed.
Costs are reserved.
17 April 2014
_______________________________________________
There is no order for costs. 
Costs will lie where they fall.
19 November 2014.

Hearing Transcripts

Related Documents

Leave judgment - leave granted — ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE SOCIETY INC v NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON CO LTD [2013] NZSC 101 [18 October 2013] (PDF 48 KB)

Substantive judgment — SUSTAIN OUR SOUNDS INCORPORATED v THE NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON COMPANY LIMITED [2014] NZSC 40 [17 April 2014] (PDF 428 KB)

Supreme court decision — cost: ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE SOCIETY INCORPORATED v THE NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON COMPANY LIMITED [2014] NZSC 167 [19 November 2014] (PDF 170 KB)

Additional Information

Hearing

19 – 21 November 2013.
Elias CJ, McGrath, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold JJ.