Millbrook neighbours claimed two editions of the New Zealand Open golf tournament felt like an invasion of privacy, according to a High Court reasons decision.
In January, Justice Rob Osborne threw out a legal challenge by X-Ray Trust, which applied for a judicial review of Queenstown council’s 2021 decision to grant consent for the tournament at Millbrook on a non-notified basis for 10 years.
The trust, through its directors Brian Cartmell and Nathan Branch, both originally from the United States, own two adjacent properties in Speargrass Flat Rd that share a 194m boundary with Millbrook’s Coronet course.
Justice Osborne’s reasons decision says Millbrook, which has co-hosted or hosted the tournament since 2014, reached agreements with the pair in 2016 and 2018 that included landscaping to screen building activity on the Coronet land, and a promise to consult with them about the development.
X-Ray gave affected party approval for the development, but not to the golf resort hosting the Open.
During last September’s hearing, Mr Cartmell said a spectator exclusion zone along their boundary with the course did not mitigate the effects of the tournament on them.
During the 2023 and 2024 events, camera towers caused "invasiveness and loss of privacy", spectators looked "straight down" into their home, and they were disturbed by crowd cheering, other noise and lighting.
Television footage and photos posted on the X social media site clearly showed their property, Mr Cartmell said.
X-Ray gave the court four grounds for review of the consent decision: the commissioner’s decision wrongly relied on a setback agreement, there was insufficient evidence to decide if the tournament affected the pair’s privacy and enjoyment of their property, the consent contained unlawful conditions, and the decision was irrational.
However, Justice Osborne said the trust’s application failed on all of those grounds.
The commissioner had followed correct process in considering their privacy and enjoyment effects, and the pair’s expectations about the degree of assessment required were "plainly disproportionate" in the circumstances.
Further, the consent decision was based on an "adequate evidential foundation", and "does not appear illogical", he said.
X-Ray Trust has appealed the High Court’s decision
Advertisement
