New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust v National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd

COURT OR TRIBUNAL

Court of Appeal of New Zealand, High Court of New Zealand

DATE FILED (OR FIRST HEARING DATE)

05/07/2010

LITIGATION TYPE

Access to Justice, Constitutional and Human Rights / State Accountability

SUBJECT MATTER

Costs, Statutory Duty

REVIEW TYPE

Judicial review

SUMMARY

(Linxplus case summary from Lexis)

Administrative law — Judicial review — National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd — Publication of research findings including temperature, rainfall, wind and other climate parameters.

Published statistical time series of nationally averaged annual mean surface temperature trends experienced in New Zealand since 1853 called Seven Station Temperature Series (7SS). 7SS indicated New Zealand experienced warming trend of approximately 0.9° Centigrade (C) from 1909 to 2009.

Coalition, associated with appellant Trust, publicly criticised accuracy of 7SS. In response, respondent published 11 Station Temperature Series (11SS) in December 2009 comprising spread sheet and graph showing unadjusted temperatures recorded at diverse number of weather stations during different periods including review of 7SS covering period from 1909 to 2008 (review). 11SS and review supported conclusion drawn from 7SS that New Zealand's climate experienced warming trend over 100 years to 2009.

Appellant sought judicial review and did not accept validity of 7SS, 11SS and review, nor conclusion that New Zealand's climate experienced warming trend.

Established respondent was statutory body and decisions did not come within category of commercial decisions subject of judicial review and remedy of judicial review was available to appellant in relation to decisions. Established court cautious about interfering with decisions made and conclusions drawn by specialist body and reluctant to adjudicate on matters of science. Accordingly, unless appellant could point to some defect in respondent's decision-making process or show decision was clearly wrong in principle or in law, court would not intervene. Application dismissed.

Two additional decisions relating to an application for public interest costs, which were refused.

CASE DOCUMENTS

New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust v National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd [2012] NZHC 2297
New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust v National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd [2012] NZHC 3560
New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust v National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd [2013] NZCA 555