Plain language law

New Zealand law explained for everyone

Fisheries Act 1996

Aquaculture - Aquaculture agreements and compensation declarations - Compensation

186ZP: Arbitrator to determine preliminary question about economic value of proposed aquaculture activities

You could also call this:

"Arbitrator decides if new aquaculture activities are more valuable than existing fishing"

Illustration for Fisheries Act 1996

When an arbitrator is working out how much compensation to give to quota owners, they must first answer a question. The question is which has more economic value to New Zealand: the proposed aquaculture activities or the fishing that the chief executive has made a reservation about. You can find more information about how this works in the regulations made under section 186ZR(1)(a). The arbitrator must use data and analysis from the holder of the coastal permit and the quota owners to answer the question. If the arbitrator decides the proposed aquaculture activities have more economic value, they will then work out the compensation for the quota owners. If the arbitrator decides the fishing has more economic value, or if they cannot decide, they will not work out the compensation for the quota owners.

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 It might be out of date or be missing some parts.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

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM4075836.

Topics:
Environment and resources > Farming and fishingMoney and consumer rights > Consumer protectionBusiness > Industry rules
Previous

186ZO: Submission to arbitration, or

"Asking someone to decide your compensation"

Next

186ZQ: Determination of compensation, or

"How much money quota owners get to make up for changes to fishing areas"

Part 9AAquaculture
Aquaculture agreements and compensation declarations: Compensation

186ZPArbitrator to determine preliminary question about economic value of proposed aquaculture activities

  1. Before determining the compensation to be provided to quota owners or a class of quota owners, an arbitrator must first determine the question in subsection (2).

  2. The question is: which of the following is of materially greater economic value to New Zealand:

  3. the proposed aquaculture activities; or
    1. the fishing in relation to which the chief executive has made a reservation.

      1. The arbitrator must determine the question on the basis of data and analysis provided by—

      2. the holder of the coastal permit; and
        1. the quota owners concerned.

          1. In determining the question, the arbitrator must follow the methodology specified in any regulations made under section 186ZR(1)(a).

          2. The arbitrator must determine the compensation payable to quota owners if the arbitrator determines the question in favour of the proposed aquaculture activities.

          3. The arbitrator must not determine the compensation payable to quota owners if the arbitrator—

          4. determines the question in favour of the fishing in relation to which the chief executive has made a reservation; or
            1. decides that the question cannot be determined one way or the other.

              Notes
              • Section 186ZP: inserted, on , by section 24 of the Fisheries Amendment Act 2011 (2011 No 68).
              • Section 186ZP(3)(a): amended, on , by section 6 of the Resource Management (Natural and Built Environment and Spatial Planning Repeal and Interim Fast-track Consenting) Act 2023 (2023 No 68).