A 20-year-old law student has won a court case against Auckland Transport after deciding to “give it a go” himself to avoid having to pay hefty fees for legal representation.
Sean O’Loughlin took a case to the High Court at Auckland arguing Auckland Transport (AT) failed to follow the law when installing three speed bumps and a raised pedestrian crossing on The Parade in Bucklands Beach.
Justice David Johnstone found the installation had been unlawful.
“Regrettably, when making its decision to install the crossing and humps, AT did not consider whether they would unduly impede vehicular traffic.
“Instead, its decision-making commenced with the assumption that reducing vehicular speeds would likely improve public safety,” Justice Johnstone noted.
“AT did not form the opinion it was required to form before it became entitled to install them.”
O’Loughlin, who lived in Bucklands Beach, told Morning Report, the main issue he had with the speed bumps was the process AT used when building them.
“I don’t have a particular dislike for them [speed bumps], but I do when the process isn’t followed.
“AT are required to consider whether there will be an impact on drivers… it’s a legal obligation they have to consider and the High Court found they had failed to consider and that made the decision unlawful.”
O’Loughlin said he chose to represent himself in court in part due to the cost of legal representation and in part, to challenge himself.
“There’s a cost to legal representation which I wasn’t too keen on paying for and probably couldn’t afford given I’m a student…
“I thought it would be interesting to to just give it a go — it’s pretty empowering to be able to plead a case in front of the High Court, especially.”
Bringing the case against AT had involved a lot of research, O’Loughlin said, which he was able to access through the university.
“I’ve got access to quite a lot of resources to be able to understand the law at a level where I can argue my case, if I didn’t think I had grounds I wouldn’t have brought proceedings… it ended up working out all right really.”
It was now a “waiting game”, O’Loughlin said, to see what AT did.
“I can’t really comment on what that decision might entail as we’re still in the appeal timeframe.”
But, he said if AT couldn’t form the opinion the speed bumps did not unduly impede traffic they would have to be removed.
O’Loughlin said he received an outpouring of support from the local community both online and in person.
“It’s been quite nice,” he said.
In the High Court ruling, Justice Johnstone said AT acted beyond its statutory powers and it must reconsider and determine whether it should have installed the crossing and speed bumps in late 2024.
“If it forms the opinion that the measures unduly impede vehicular traffic to any extent, then to that extent it must remove them.”
An AT spokesperson said AT was reviewing the decision documentation and processes in light of the judgement.
rnz.co.nz
