Bypass opponents ordered to pay $36,000
Opponents of the $200 million Mt Messenger bypass have been stung with a $36,000 bill after failing to overturn a legal decision – but say they hope to continue their fight in the Supreme Court.
In the ongoing litigious saga of the State Highway 3 roading project, Poutama Kaitiaki Charitable Trust and farmers Tony and Debbie Pascoe have been ordered to pay Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency $27,030.90 and $9177.60, respectively.
Russell Gibbs, of Poutama, said the trust and the Pascoes hope to appeal the costs decision as part of the continuing fight to overturn a court ruling denying its hapu¯ status.
Poutama has sought leave to bypass the next step in the process, the Court of Appeal, Gibbs said.
‘‘We’ve applied for the right to have it heard in Supreme Court. First they have to decide if they are going to give us a hearing.’’
Gibbs is unsure when the decision will be made. The Pascoes could not be reached for comment.
Poutama, which has unsuccessfully claimed to be tangata whenua, or kaitiaki (guardian) of the Mangapekepeke
Valley – the route for the bypass – has been fighting against the project alongside the Pascoes, whose land the highway will pass over.
Late last year, Poutama and the Pascoes made an unsuccessful bid in the High Court to overturn an interim Environment Court decision to allow construction of the bypass.
They then applied to the High Court to have that judgment recalled, which was also rejected.
Waka Kotahi sought costs in relation to both court proceedings, it was detailed in two High Court judgements released last week.
In relation to the failed appeal, the transport agency sought $21,414.40 from Poutama and $9177.60 from the Pascoes.
Poutama and the Pascoes opposed the costs, submitting, among other arguments, there was a significant disparity of resources between themselves and Waka Kotahi.
‘‘The Pascoes are nearing retirement age with subsistencetype living. They have inadequate funds to pay and would unlikely be able to finance borrowing,’’ read submissions in the judgment.
‘‘Poutama is a charitable trust operating without public funds to represent the interests of its hapu¯ and wha¯nau. Nga¯ Hapu¯ o Poutama have become destitute and unable to rely on traditional resources and is in a cycle of poverty and unemployment. A costs award would amount to muru [to plunder].’’
But Justice Christine Grice ruled financial hardship had not been met and it was not a relevant factor.
She ordered Poutama and the
Pascoes to pay costs.
In relation to the application to recall the appeal judgment, the trust has previously claimed it had a cultural connection as tangata whenua and kaitiakitanga/management of the private land owned by the Pascoes.
The Environment Court decision found Te Ru¯ nanga a Nga¯ti Tama Trust instead exercised mana whenua and kaitiakitanga of the project area, and Poutama had no cultural connection under the Resource Management Act.
Justice Grice found the Environment Court had an evidential basis for its decision and made no error of law in its assessment of cultural issues.
The application was dismissed.
Waka Kotahi then sought costs of $5616.50 from Poutama with a 50 per cent uplift, totalling $8424.75.
In the costs-related judgment, Waka Kotahi argued an uplift was necessary as Poutama had failed to act reasonably and had attempted to relitigate matters through the recall application, which can be an abuse of process.
Poutama again argued financial hardship, which Justice Grice said was not an answer to a claim of costs.
The trust was ordered to pay the $5616.50.