Ecolex Logo
El portal del
derecho ambiental
Resultados de la búsqueda » Jurisprudencia

Rarotongan Beach Resort & Spa Ltd v Tepa

Tipo de la corte
Nacional - corte superior
Fecha
Jun 11, 2008
Fuente
UNEP, InforMEA
Nombre del tribunal
Court of Appeal
Sede de la corte
Raratonga
Juez
BARKER JA, HENRY JA and PETERSON JA
Número de referencia
CA NO. 11/07
Idioma
Inglés
Materia
Cuestiones jurídicas, Medio ambiente gen.
Palabra clave
Participación pública
Resumen

The appeal was made against a High Court judgment allowing the Appellant to carry out specific works on the foreshore of the Aroa Beach at Rutaki where the Appellant operated a beach resort. Several consents had been granted before this judgment including a permit to remove deteriorated coastal protection units and three consents to carry out remedial work when erosion again occurred on the beach. A fifth application regarding remedial work was not yet processed at the time. The High Court upheld that the Authority had acted unlawfully in relation to three of the consents.

 

Four main questions were considered by the court. First, whether the Authority was in breach when determining whether the application was handled in accordance with the correct provision. Second, whether the decision to not let the application be governed by the correct provision was so unreasonable that it required quashing. Third, whether the Authority was under an obligation to consult with the first respondents in the case. Forth, whether the orders granting relief were appropriate in the circumstances.

 

The court answered the questions as follows. The decision by the Authority to proceed with the case under the section 50 rules could not be classified as a breach of section 36 obligations. The court likewise did not see this as unreasonable. Moreover, the court did not find that he first respondents had an enforceable legitimate expectation to be consulted on an application under section 50 as the statute did not impose such an obligation.

 

Finally, the appeal was allowed in part. The orders by the High Court quashing the second and third consents given were confirmed. All other orders were set aside. Thus it was for the Authority to consider these applications and which provisions should govern them.

Texto completo
Rarotongan Beach Resort & Spa Ltd v Tepa.pdf