Save

Trans-Tasman Resources Limited v. Taranaki-Whanganui Conservation Board

In: The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law
Authors:
Robert A. Makgill Barrister Auckland New Zealand Ghent Maritime Institute Ghent Belgium

Search for other papers by Robert A. Makgill in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
James D. Gardner-Hopkins Barrister Wellington New Zealand

Search for other papers by James D. Gardner-Hopkins in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Natalie R. Coates Partner, Kāhui Legal Wellington New Zealand

Search for other papers by Natalie R. Coates in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution

Purchase

Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):

$40.00

Abstract

On 3 April 2020, the Court of Appeal delivered a judgment quashing a decision to approve a seabed mining proposal within New Zealand’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ). This article discusses the judgment’s background, its references to the law of the sea and other international law, and the Court of Appeal’s four key findings. These findings include that the seabed mining approval: (a) failed to ensure protection of the marine environment from pollution; (b) failed to favour caution and protection where information is uncertain or inadequate; (c) failed to integrate decision-making between the EEZ and territorial sea; and (d) failed to adopt an approach to effects consistent with indigenous rights. The article concludes with some observations on the judgment’s relevance to State practice and seabed mining under international law.

Content Metrics

All Time Past 365 days Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 1105 114 15
Full Text Views 129 36 0
PDF Views & Downloads 282 66 1