Quarantine Waste (NZ) Limited v Waste Resources Limited [1994] NZRMA 529 (HC, 2 March 1994)

Notification; affected parties; standing, reasonable decision

1. A proposal to use the waste incinerator at the Auckland Airport for disposing of waste created outside the airport in addition to its existing use was opposed by a rival waste disposal company. The proposal was granted consent on a non-notified basis, and the decision was judicially reviewed.

2. The High Court found that the rival waste disposal company did not have standing to bring an action in judicial review because they did not establish that they had been affected by the decision. Whether or not the consent authority acting under section 94(2) is correct in thinking that the adverse effect on the environment will be minor, a challenge to its decision can be made only by someone who has been ‘affected’ by the decision and has not given written approval.

3. It was also held that in a judicial review decision, the Court does not substitute its own decision for that of the consent authority. It merely determines whether proper procedures were followed, whether all relevant and no irrelevant considerations were taken into account, and whether the decision was reasonably made. Unless the statute otherwise directs, the weight to be given to particular relevant matters is for the consent authority, not the Court, to determine.