Section 82 — Resource Management Act 1991: Disputes

82 Disputes (1) Subsection (2) applies if there is a dispute about— (a) whether there is an inconsistency between a water conservation order and a regional policy statement or a plan; or (b) whether there is an inconsistency between a regional policy statement or a regional plan and a district plan (including any rules of a plan) on a matter of regional significance; or (c) whether a regional policy statement or a plan gives effect to a national policy statement or New Zealand coastal policy statement. (2) A Minister or local authority responsible for a relevant national policy statement, New Zealand coastal policy statement, policy statement, plan, or order may refer a dispute to the Environment Court for a decision resolving the matter. (3) If, after considering the matter referred to it under subsection (2) , the Court considers that there is an inconsistency as described in subsection (1)(a) or (b) , or the statement or plan does not give effect to a national policy statement or New Zealand coastal policy statement as referred to in subsection (1)(c) ,— (a) the Court must order the authority responsible for the policy statement or plan to initiate a change to the policy statement or plan; or (b) if the Court considers that it is of minor significance that does not affect the general intent and purpose of the policy statement, plan, or order concerned, the Court may allow it to remain. The words “ Environment Court ” in the original subsections (1) to (5) (and “ Court ” in subsection (5)) were substituted, as from 2 September 1996, for the words “ Planning Tribunal ” and “ Tribunal ” pursuant to section 6(2)(a) Resource Management Amendment Act 1996 (1996 No 160). Section 82 was substituted, as from 1 August 2003, by section 36 Resource Management Amendment Act 2003 (2003 No 23). See sections 109 to 113 of that Act as to the transitional and savings provisions.