Last week’s decision on Greenpeace NZ’s appeal on the extent to which purposes that are “political” (including the advocacy of particular views) can be charitable, saw the Supreme Court divided on the narrow line of judicial intervention/parliamentary intention: RE GREENPEACE OF NEW ZEALAND
Want to read more? It's easy.
Choose your best value subscription option
Individual
Group membership
NBR Marketplace
Yearly Premium Online Subscription
NZ$499.00 / yearly
Monthly Premium Online Subscription
NZ$44.95 / monthly
Smartphone Only Subscription
NZ$24.95 / monthly
Premium Group Membership 10 Users
NZ$350+GST / monthly
$35 per user - Pay by monthly credit card debitPremium Group Membership 20 Users
NZ$600+GST / monthly
$30 per user - Pay by monthly credit card debitPremium Group Membership 50 Users
NZ$1250+GST / monthly
$25 per user - Pay by monthly credit card debitPremium Group Membership 100 Users
NZ$1875+GST / monthly
$18.75 per user - Pay by monthly credit card debitYearly Premium Online Subscription + NBR Marketplace
NZ$499.00 / yearly
Already have an account? Login
Penny Pepperell of Capital Letter
Wed, 11 Jul 2018
Wed, 11 Jul 2018
© All content copyright NBR. Do not reproduce in any form without permission, even if you have a paid subscription.
Capital Letter: Judges try to work out what Parliament meant in Greenpeace case
40329