The judge conducting the review in the High Court will hear evidence of fact and submissions on law. The High Court can then make an order. The order can be an injunction to stop something, or an order of specific performance to make something happen, or even an order confirming the disputed issue. The Court can make a declaratory judgment (which cannot then be contested by Police – subject to their right of appeal).
In this case I am asking the High Court to make a declaratory judgment that my H&K SL8-4 is a non-military style semi-automatic rifle – it is a semi-automatic rifle that is kept in a sporting configuration for the purposes of section 2 of the Arms Act 1983.
The case is framed in this way to avoid certain traps – for example: It is doubtful that I could ask the court to overturn an "administrative decision" of the Police to reclassify semi-auto firearms. The Police have no statutory authority to reclassify firearms therefore their reinterpretation of the Arms Act is not as such, an administrative decision.
In the course of this case the Court will be obliged to consider the interpretation of section 2 of the arms act – dealing with the definition of an MSSA.
This effects all FAL holders in New Zealand and its outcome will not only define MSSA but it will also either encourage or discourage Police to manipulate the interpretation of the law to suit their own agenda in the future…. Could be with firearms, could be with that inconsequential smack… could be with anything. So really this has a wider consequence for all New Zealanders.
Please support this case in any way you can.