[Full judgment: Royal_Forest__Bird_v_Buller_DC__Ors_20130712_1.pdf]
ROYAL FOREST AND BIRD PROTECTION SOCIETY OF NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED v BULLER DISTRICT COUNCIL AND WEST COAST REGIONAL
COUNCIL [2013] NZHC 1766 [12 July 2013]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY
CIV-2013-409-683
[2013] NZHC 1766
IN THE MATTER of an appeal under s 299 Resource Management Act 1991
BETWEEN ROYAL FOREST AND BIRD PROTECTION SOCIETY OF NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED
Appellant
AND BULLER DISTRICT COUNCIL AND WEST COAST REGIONAL COUNCIL
First Respondent
BULLER COAL LIMITED
Second Respondent
WEST COAST ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK INCORPORATED
Non Party
Hearing: 12 July 2013
(By way of telephone conference)
Appearances: P D Anderson for Appellant
B G Williams for First Respondent
J Appleyard for Second Respondent
Q A M Davies for Non Party
Judgment: 12 July 2013
JUDGMENT OF FOGARTY J
[1] The applicant applies for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal against the whole of the decision of the High
Court, delivered by myself on 6 June 2013, dismissing the applicant’s appeal from a decision of the Environment Court.
This was one of two judgments, the second being delivered the next day. The first judgment related to a preliminary
legal issue which arose in considering an application by Buller Coal, a subsidiary of Bathurst Mines, for resource
consents for an open cast mine, known as the Escarpment Mine, on the Denniston Plateau, on the West Coast. The
preliminary legal issue related to whether, when assessing the effects of the Escarpment Mine, regard must be had to the
effects of a permitted use under s 107 of the Crown Minerals Act 1991; specifically, an unimplemented coal mining
licence for the Sullivan Block which adjoins the Escarpment Mine. Forest and Bird contends that the effects of the
permitted but unimplemented coal mining licence for the Sullivan Block on indigenous vegetation and habitats of
indigenous fauna are part of the receiving environment, against which the effects of the Escarpment Mine must be
assessed, and are relevant cumulatively with the effects of the Escarpment Mine.
[2] The question now is whether this Court is of the opinion that the question of law involved in the appeal is one
which, by reason of its general or public importance, or for any other reason, ought to be submitted to the Court of
Appeal for decision. The case law provides there must be a question of law capable of serious argument, involving a
public or private interest which is sufficient in its importance to outweigh the costs and delay to the parties of
permitting another appeal.
[...]
[21] For these reasons this application for leave to appeal is dismissed. Costs are reserved.
[Full judgment: Royal_Forest__Bird_v_Buller_DC__Ors_20130712_1.pdf]