The second cause of action is also clearly arguable and perhaps more than arguable given the material that has become available since the proceedings were filed. The Minister did not take a preferred position to Cabinet. Rather, he chaired a meeting at which strong views were expressed and appears to have accepted the views of Cabinet. The views of Cabinet do not reflect the medical advice set out in the RIS. Whether that suffices as an exercise of the Minister’s statutory power will need to be decided, but the factual picture is now quite clear, and it supports PATHA’s position that this was a political decision and contrary to advice from the Ministry which also feeds into the third cause of action.[Emphasis added]
So basically a case for inappropriate decision-maker and irrationality right there.
The judge has urged that the judicial review be heard urgently, so we'll probably get a final decision on this in the middle of next year, just in time for regime parties to use it to whip up hate for their election campaign. Oh joy.