Appeal decision puzzles counsel

Press, 31 October 1977, Page 2

Appeal decision puzzles counsel

Solicitors for the North Canterbury Catchment Board and Regional Water Board and the Canterbury Frozen Meat Company, Ltd, are puzzled by a decision of the No. 2 Town and Country Planning Appeal Board. In its decision, reported in “The Press,” of October 27, the appeal board declined jurisdiction in an appeal by the company against a refusal by the Regional Water Board to extend a temporary permit allowing waste to be discharged into the Waimakariri River.

“Legally and practically I do not think the decision solves any of the problems of the board,” its solicitor (Mr N. Taylor) told a meeting of the Catchment Board’s water committee yesterday. The appeal board found

that, under a temporary permit, the quantity of effluent discharged would not be allowed to be increased. Mr Taylor said that on this legal point, the appeal board had found in favour of the Regional Water Board.

The “fly in the ointment” was that the appeal board had declined jurisdiction, and it was not clear what that statement meant. There were several reasons why the appeal board might have declined jurisdiction but the most likely one was that the decision left the door open for the company to continue to discharge effluent, although in breach of the appropriate act.

The chairman of the catchment board (Dr W. R. Holmes) said that the question of extensions of time had not been clarified.

“Catchment boards up and down the country have been reissuing permits,” he said. “This is now in question.”

Dr Holmes said that the effluent was a “major conspicuous source of pollution in the board’s area” and it was not helping the board to get tied up with legal problems. The committee appointed a sub-committee to take any necessary action before the December meeting of the board.

The committee indicated that, it would wait to see what action the company took to clarify the situation. If necessary it may appeal to the Supreme Court.