Harm Minimisation Court of Appeal Judgement
We are disappointed to report that the Court of Appeal has upheld the High Court decision in the Judicial review case that we (and several individual members) brought against the 2023 Harm Minimisation regulations. Please read the Judgement here
The Court found:
The initial discussion document that was provided to everyone provided sufficient detail of the new cash withdrawal duties and sweep duties: para 28.
After receiving the regulations, GMANZ was free to discuss the general policy content of the draft regulations with its members without breaching privilege: para 41.
It is lawful to impose criminal sanctions for inaction relating to additional signs of harm that are not listed in the regulations and signs that may be vague.
The threshold for quashing regulations for unreasonableness is a high standard, and only applicable if the regulations effects are “outrageous”: para 58
The decision is obviously very disappointing. It was clear that the discussion document did not give notice of the new duties as no one made submissions on these. GMANZ, very reasonably, considered it could not discuss the privileged regulations with its members. Imposing criminal actions for failing to act following a vague sign of harm, such as rubbing or talking to a machine, is clearly problematic.
We will be reviewing the decision, and look forward to discussing the result at the GMANZ AGM scheduled for 29 October in Wellington.
