A group which formed a year after a planning decision should still be able to challenge that ruling, a High Court judge was told yesterday.
In the High Court at Auckland, the Auckland City Council and AMP Asset Management are seeking the striking out of proceedings brought by the Society for the Protection of Auckland City and the Waterfront.
The society has applied for a judicial review of the council's decision in May last year to exempt AMP's waterfront tower development from public submissions.
But the council and AMP say the group has no standing to seek the review.
Mary Peters, for AMP, questioned how the society could claim to be affected by the council's decision when it did not exist at the time.
AMP sought security for costs of $100,000 as an alternative to its application to strike out.
Miss Peters said the society was using the cloak of incorporation to seek the review without putting its members' money on the line. It had a membership of 17.
"If its membership is growing, what's wrong with them throwing in a couple of thousand, if they're serious about it?"
With work under way on the 34-level tower and tenants being found, AMP faced huge costs if the review succeeded.
For the society, Michael Savage said the society or its members would clearly be affected if the development proceeded, as would other Aucklanders using the downtown area.
The council had identified the harbour edge as a unique resource and introduced a height control to provide a scale of building which was sensitive to the environment.
It was beside the point that the society was not incorporated until June 30, 2000. Had AMP's proposal been notified for public comment, incorporation could have proceeded and the society could have made a submission.
Justice David Morris said the society faced an uphill task. But at the conclusion of the hearing, he reserved his decision.
www.myproperty.co.nz
AMP Tower battle in court
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.