Maritime Transport Act 1994

Protection of marine environment from hazardous ships, structures, and offshore operations

251: Right to compensation

You could also call this:

"Getting paid back if the Director's actions cause you loss or damage"

If you have spent money or suffered loss or damage because of something the Director did under section 248 or section 249, you can ask the Crown for compensation. You can do this if the Director's action was not necessary to protect the marine environment or if it did not help enough to be worth the cost. The Director's action must have been very costly or caused a lot of damage for you to get compensation.

If you take the Crown to court to get compensation, the court will think about a few things to decide if the Director's action was worth it. The court will consider how likely it was that a harmful substance would get into the sea if the Director had not acted. The court will also think about whether the Director's action would actually work and how much damage it caused. You can get compensation if the court decides the Director's action was not a good idea or did not help enough.

This text is automatically generated. It might be out of date or be missing some parts. Find out more about how we do this.

This page was last updated on 25 May 2025

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM337338.

250: Exercise of power by Director, or

"The Director's Power to Protect the Marine Environment"

252: Compliance with instructions, or

"Follow the Director's instructions to protect the marine environment"

Part 20Protection of marine environment from hazardous ships, structures, and offshore operations

251Right to compensation

Any person who has incurred expense, or suffered loss or damage, as a result of any action duly taken under instructions issued by the Director under section 248 or section 249, or as a result of any measure taken by the Director under either of those sections, may recover compensation from the Crown if the action or measure—
was not reasonably necessary—
1. to protect the marine environment or marine interests from a harmful substance; or
2. to prevent or reduce the risk of a harmful substance being discharged into the sea; or
was such that the good done by the action or measure, or the good likely to be done, was disproportionately less than the expense incurred, or the loss or damage suffered, as a result of that action or that measure.

Where a claim is brought against the Crown for compensation under this section, the court, in determining whether subsection (1)(b) applies, shall take into account—
the probability of a harmful substance being discharged into the sea if the action or measure had not been taken; and
the likelihood of the action or measure taken being effective; and
the extent of the loss or the damage which has been caused by the action or measure taken.

Compare

1974 No 14 s 27