On 3 October 1957 the case went before the court, which found in favour of the tenants:

In his written decision the Magistrate said that a tenancy had been created by reason of the acceptance of rent over a period of years. Having held that the sections were subject to the Tenancy Act, the questions of alternative accommodation and the relative hardship had to be considered.

The cottages had been built with the consent of the domain board, and the alternative accommodation was not acceptable to the tenants.⁸⁶

The Crown then appealed against the decision to the Supreme Court and sought possession of the reserve on the following grounds:

(a) That the occupiers had become tenants within the definition of the Tenancy Act by payment of ground rent to the Katikati Domain Board, and suitable alternative accommodation was available at the ocean front at Waihi beach; or

(b) That the occupiers were “squatters” holding their respective sites without right, title or license.⁸⁷

A hearing was held in the Supreme Court in Auckland on 22 April 1958. The judgment of T.A. Gresson was issued on 10 July 1958 in favour of the Crown. Judge Gresson reversed the decision of the Magistrate’s Court, and ordered that the tenants must vacate. In his judgment Gresson described the building of private baches on the small area of suitable domain land at Bowentown as being quite inconsistent with the proclaimed purpose of a domain. The judgment stated that a board had no legal powers to permit the erection of privately owned buildings on domains and that such occupiers had no protection under the Tenancy Act, and, as the land was provided for public rather than private recreation, then the Crown was entitled to its possession.⁸⁸

Even though the Supreme Court had brought judgment in favour of the Crown, the tenants refused to remove their baches. However, once the access road to the bay had been bulldozed, the baches too could be bulldozed. By December 1958 the area had been levelled.⁸⁹ In its annual report for that year the board declared it had been ‘a memorable year in the history of the Katikati Domain Board, in that it has seen the departure of the Bowentown squatters after many years of negotiation.’⁹⁰

Although it is clear from the judge’s interpretation of the legislation that the domain was intended for public rather than private use, the tenants who were evicted could rightly feel they had been badly treated by both the Crown and the board administering the domain. They built their holiday baches with the active encouragement of the board which pegged out sections. The board, for most of this time, was quite prepared to ignore the legislation because they were gaining revenue and free labour to maintain the domain. The history of the removal of the bach

⁸⁶ Evening Post, 3 October 1957 [p 43]

⁸⁷ Judgment in the Supreme Court of New Zealand Northern District Auckland Registry, 10 July 1958, LS 3/2/40 [pp 50-52]

⁸⁸ Ibid

⁸⁹ Ibid

⁹⁰ Katikati Domain Board, Annual Report for year ending 31 March 1959, Katikati Domain Records, WBoPDC [p 13]