"Today's decision by the court is a good result for Ports of Auckland and it gives certainty to all parties and avoids long drawn out legal wrangling," says POAL spokesman Matt Ball.
Work can carry on with two wharf extensions at Auckland port on the Waitemata Harbour after Ports of Auckland won its High Court application for a quick substantive hearing of a judicial review launched by Urban Auckand over the legality of the resource consents for the wharves.
Justice Rebecca Ellis rejected Urban Auckland's application for an interim hearing to stop Ports of Auckland (POAL) from constructing the two new wharves. Instead Justice Ellis granted POAL's request to hear the substantive case at the earliest opportunity. The hearing has been set down for June 2-4.
"Today's decision by the court is a good result for Ports of Auckland and it gives certainty to all parties and avoids long drawn out legal wrangling," says POAL spokesman Matt Ball. "It also means the company is free to continue with construction."
POAL's lawyer QC Jim Farmer said if the interim hearing had been granted the same arguments would have been heard twice, so the parties might as well have a full hearing in June.
Ports of Auckland has given Urban Auckland a guarantee that if the resource consents are found to be unlawful and subsquent applications for consents fail, or a Port Future Study by Auckland Council finds the port doesn't need to be expanded, the extensions will be removed.
At the full hearing, Urban Auckland will argue Ports of Auckland’s resource consent applications should have been publicly notified.
In its lawyer’s letter outlining the challenge, Urban Auckland says the council made errors in its Resource Management Act decisions to grant eight separate consents for the wharves when it should have looked at all applications as one.
“It misinterpreted the NZ Coastal Policy Statement, made factual errors in its assessment of the benefits of the wharves and errors in its assessment of the visual impact the large structures will have on public views,” Urban Auckland says. "Rather than protect the harbour, the council has allowed POAL to take more for itself without any public input.
“This is unlawful and the council should have bundled the relevant consents together, and looked at the bigger picture. Integrated management requires nothing less.”
