Finnigan v New Zealand Rugby Football Union
| Finnigan v New Zealand Rugby Football Union | |
|---|---|
 |
|
| Court | Court of Appeal of New Zealand |
| Full case name | Finnigan and another v. New Zealand Rugby Football Union (Incorporated) and others |
| Decided | 21 June 1985 |
| Citation(s) | [1985] 2 NZLR 159 |
| Transcript(s) | Court of Appeal judgment |
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Cooke, Richardson, McMullin, Somers JJ, and Sir Thaddeus McCarthy |
| Keywords | |
| standing, judicial review, All Blacks, South Africa | |
Finnigan v New Zealand Rugby Football Union, was a case taken by a member of the Auckland University Rugby Football Club and a member of the Teachers Rugby Football Club against the decision of the New Zealand Rugby Football Union (NZRFU) Council to accept an invitation for the All Blacks to tour South Africa. The invitation came just four years after the 1981 South Africa rugby union tour of New Zealand had divided the New Zealand public over the All Blacks refusal to participate in the sporting boycott of South Africa during the Apartheid era. The decision primarily concerned whether the two plaintiffs had sufficient standing to challenge the NZRFU decision. The decision marked the adoption of the principles of R v Inland Revenue Commissioners ex p National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses [1982] AC 617 approach to standing in judicial review into New Zealand law.
On 20 May 1985 the two plaintiffs, as members of two Auckland rugby union clubs, sought to overturn a decision by the NZRFU Council to accept an invitation for the All Blacks to tour South Africa. As Cooke J noted,
They claimed that the decision failed to comply with the object of promoting, fostering and developing amateur rugby union football throughout New Zealand, and that for various specified reasons it gives the game a tarnished and sullied image and will reflect adversely on the game. These contentions we will refer to as the against-the-objects ground. They also claimed that the decision was outside the powers of the Council and could only have been made by the Union in general meeting. This we will refer to as the wrong body ground. They claimed therefore that the decision was invalid and unlawful, and sought a declaration and injunction.
The NZRFU as defendants sought to strike out the statement of claim as, "disclosing no cause of action and as frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process." On 6 June the defendants strike out application was heard in the High Court by Sir Ronald Davison, the Chief Justice, who struck out the claim and dismissed the action, declining to grant the plaintiffs standing. The plaintiffs appealed.
...
Wikipedia