30 April 2026

Interim Injunctions in the Māori Land Court – A Guide for Trustees and Whānau

Manaaki Whenua, Manaaki Tāngata, Haere Whakamua

Interim Injunctions in the Māori Land Court – A Guide for Trustees and Whānau

When unexpected activity occurs on whenua Māori such as earthworks, new buildings, unauthorised trustee decisions or rising whānau tension, the situation can quickly become stressful and uncertain.  In these moments, trustees and whānau often need a way to stabilise matters and prevent further harm while the underlying issues are properly addressed.  Where attempts to resolve matters have broken down, an interim injunction can be appropriate.

What is an interim injunction?

An interim injunction is a short‑term Court order that either halts an activity or requires something to be done.  In the Māori Land Court, interim injunctions are commonly sought to stop earthworks, prevent unauthorised occupation, protect wāhi tapu or urupā, or prevent trustees or individuals acting beyond their authority.  With the amendments to Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993, interim injunctions are now also able to require a person to act, including ordering the removal of structures or objects, or the restoration of land to its previous condition.

A substantive application must also be filed

An interim injunction must be supported by a main application that asks the Court to determine the underlying dispute.  If granted, the interim injunction can remain in place until the substantive application is determined.

Common applications filed alongside interim injunctions include:

• Review of Trust applications
• Occupation applications
• Wāhi tapu and urupā protection applications

These applications give the Court the jurisdiction to address the core issues once the immediate risk has been paused.

Legal test

To grant an interim injunction, the Court applies a three‑part test:

• Serious Issue to Be Tried – Is there a genuine issue requiring proper consideration?
• Balance of Convenience – Who is likely to suffer greater harm if the injunction is granted or refused?
• Overall Justice – What is the fairest approach in all the circumstances?

The Court relies on clear, practical evidence showing why a restriction is necessary.  This usually includes photographs, correspondence, trust records and information about the further harm that may occur if no injunction is granted.

Just as importantly, tikanga evidence is often very persuasive.  Statements from kaumātua explaining the relevant local tikanga or kawa, whakapapa responsibilities, and cultural or spiritual impacts help the Court understand the depth of the potential harm.

Considering an interim injunction?

An interim injunction is generally a last resort, used only when less formal steps such as seeking a hui, exchanging correspondence, or attempting mediation, have not resolved the issues.  However, it can be used as a temporary measure to protect the whenua, steady relationships, and support good decision‑making.

If you need advice on whether an interim injunction is appropriate for you, the Kahurangi team at McCaw Lewis can help you understand your options and navigate this process.