Plaintiff ‘flabbergasted’

Press, 26 February 1986, Page 9

Plaintiff ‘flabbergasted’

Mr Des King is “flabbergasted” that his High Court case against the Christchurch Metropolitan Refuse Disposal Committee has failed.

Mr King, one of three plaintiffs in the case, said he expected to win the case after an admission by the defendants’ lawyers that their clients "had done some things wrong.” One of these things was

the failure of the local councils involved to reconstitute the committee after local body elections, he said.

Mr King was reluctant to comment specifically on the judgment of Mr Justice Williamson, because he had not read it. He would not rule out the possibility of an appeal, saying that the plaintiffs had expected the case to go to appeal

anyway — “at the initiative of the defendants when they lost the case.”

The three plaintiffs were all “token plaintiffs,” acting on behalf of the Redwood Co-ordinat-ing Committee, and a decision on future action would be made by this committee, he said.

Mr King has consistently opposed the third

transfer station, which was approved by the Refuse Disposal Committee on December 13, 1984. Opposition to the station was a main plank in his successful campaign for a seat on the Waimairi District Council in February, 1985.

Aside from the legal issues, Mr King said there were more efficient methods of refuse dis-

posal than burying it in the ground. The stations were also bound to be unprofitable unless the refuse disposal committee charged exorbitant fees.

Mr Ron Wright, chairman of the Refuse Disposal Committee, would also not comment on the judgment, except to say that the third transfer station was in the interests of Christchurch.

The new station would relieve pressure on the two existing stations, and also lessen the heavy traffic movement from the western side of the city, he said.

The failure to reconstitute the committee after local body elections was an oversight, and steps had been taken to prevent a repetition.