Post by Kiwi Frontline on Jul 14, 2019 7:08:49 GMT 12
SLOW PROGRESS ON MARINE AND COASTAL AREA CLAIMS
The High Court has recently completed a series of case management conferences throughout the country to hear from the 200 or so parties that have made claims to the High Court under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011. Essentially the purpose of the hearings was to report progress to the High Court, or more specifically to Justice Churchman who has assumed responsibility for hearing the claims following the appointment of Justice Collins to the Court of Appeal.
The appointment of Justice Churchman was not without controversy. Following his disclosure of interest, in a Court Minute dated 11 April 2019, he advised:
“[2] By way of disclosure of potential conflict of interest, I advise that, when in practice as a barrister, and, prior to that, as a solicitor, I received instructions to act on behalf of, or provide advice to, a number of iwi. That advice and representation did not include any matters under the Act but spanned a number of issues including advice on Treaty of Waitangi claims, administrative law issues and employment related matters.
[3] The iwi involved were:
(a) Ngāti Toa Rangatira (principally in respect of the Northern South Island inquiry);
(b) Hokotehi Moriori Trust (Rekohu);
(c) Rangitane Ki Wairau;
(d) Ngai Tahu; and
(e) Ngāti Rangitihi.
[4] My daughter-in-law and mokopuna whakapapa to Ngāti Ruanui.”
He then added:
“[5] I do not believe that any of these matters raises a conflict of interest that would impact upon me managing these proceedings but if any party or lawyer has a different view, they should notify the Registry immediately.”
A number of parties to the appeals disagreed, and lodged notices for the Judge to recuse himself from hearing the cases. Justice Churchman considered those requests but remained of the view that there was no conflict of interest.
To a layman not expert in the nuances of High Court protocol, it seems bizarre that the person accused of bias should be the person who judges whether the concerns have substance. Logically, that should be someone who can take the role of “a fair-minded, fully informed observer” to assess whether there is “a reasonable apprehension that the judge might not bring an impartial mind to the resolution of the question the judge is required to decide”. The issue of bias is important for reasons that will become clear.....
Continue reading Frank Newman’s NZCPR guest commentary here > www.nzcpr.com/slow-progress-on-marine-and-coastal-area-claims/#more-29654
The High Court has recently completed a series of case management conferences throughout the country to hear from the 200 or so parties that have made claims to the High Court under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011. Essentially the purpose of the hearings was to report progress to the High Court, or more specifically to Justice Churchman who has assumed responsibility for hearing the claims following the appointment of Justice Collins to the Court of Appeal.
The appointment of Justice Churchman was not without controversy. Following his disclosure of interest, in a Court Minute dated 11 April 2019, he advised:
“[2] By way of disclosure of potential conflict of interest, I advise that, when in practice as a barrister, and, prior to that, as a solicitor, I received instructions to act on behalf of, or provide advice to, a number of iwi. That advice and representation did not include any matters under the Act but spanned a number of issues including advice on Treaty of Waitangi claims, administrative law issues and employment related matters.
[3] The iwi involved were:
(a) Ngāti Toa Rangatira (principally in respect of the Northern South Island inquiry);
(b) Hokotehi Moriori Trust (Rekohu);
(c) Rangitane Ki Wairau;
(d) Ngai Tahu; and
(e) Ngāti Rangitihi.
[4] My daughter-in-law and mokopuna whakapapa to Ngāti Ruanui.”
He then added:
“[5] I do not believe that any of these matters raises a conflict of interest that would impact upon me managing these proceedings but if any party or lawyer has a different view, they should notify the Registry immediately.”
A number of parties to the appeals disagreed, and lodged notices for the Judge to recuse himself from hearing the cases. Justice Churchman considered those requests but remained of the view that there was no conflict of interest.
To a layman not expert in the nuances of High Court protocol, it seems bizarre that the person accused of bias should be the person who judges whether the concerns have substance. Logically, that should be someone who can take the role of “a fair-minded, fully informed observer” to assess whether there is “a reasonable apprehension that the judge might not bring an impartial mind to the resolution of the question the judge is required to decide”. The issue of bias is important for reasons that will become clear.....
Continue reading Frank Newman’s NZCPR guest commentary here > www.nzcpr.com/slow-progress-on-marine-and-coastal-area-claims/#more-29654