Co-governance Design and Implementation: Lessons from Norman v Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority

Norman v Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority is a judicial review of the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority's decision to fell and remove all the exotic (non-native) trees on Ōwairaka/Mt Albert. Whilst the High Court dismissed the review and allowed the operation to proceed, that decision was overturned by the Court ofAppeal because the Maunga Authority failed to consult in accordance with statutory requirements. The Norman litigation has implications and lessons for all co-governance arrangements in Aotearoa New Zealand. This article argues that whilst the relevant Treaty of Waitangi settlement legislation allows for meaningful power-sharing within the Maunga Authority, and the co-governance partners sought to meaningfully share power, the Maunga Authority could have done more to consult and act in good faith. It also contends that tikanga Māori gives rise to a duty to consult and ought to be contemplated by counsel as a basis for a duty to consult in the future.