Court action following Erebus disaster inquiry

Court action following Erebus disaster inquiry

Judge Mahon, who had presided over the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Erebus disaster, resigned from the bench of the High Court in January 1982.

Resignations and court action

Justice Peter Mahon's accusation that Air New Zealand had presented 'an orchestrated litany of lies' at the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Erebus disaster drew an almost immediate response from the airline. Hours after the report was released on 27 April 1981, Air New Zealand chief executive Morrie Davis made a brief media statement rejecting the allegations made against him. The following day the chair of Air New Zealand's board, C.W. Mace, said that it had instructed counsel to begin High Court proceedings to set aside the findings of the inquiry 'in the area of staff integrity'. This decision was quickly backed by Prime Minister Rob Muldoon.

Court of Appeal

Air New Zealand asked that the judicial review of the Inquiry's allegations and findings be heard in the Court of Appeal rather than the High Court. This request was initially denied, but later accepted because of 'the magnitude of the disaster', 'the public importance of the issues', and 'the conduct of an inquiry held by a high court judge'.

On 3 May Mace stated that the board was standing behind Davis, but the chief executive announced his retirement the following day. He explained that this was not an admission of guilt, but 'an attempt to remove a focus point from the current controversy and by doing so [to] hasten the recovery of the company'.

Further investigations

The State Services Commission responded quickly to Mahon's criticisms of the Civil Aviation Division (CAD) of the Ministry of Transport. Amid calls for its director, Captain E.T. Kippenberger, to be removed from office, the SSC set up an internal inquiry to determine whether any CAD employees should be charged under the State Services Act 1962. Its report, released on 8 June 1981, found that there had been ‘significant shortfalls in the overall performance of civil aviation in relation to the Antarctic flights', but that no act made CAD officials in any way 'culpable' for the Erebus disaster.

During the same period a police investigation was also in progress. Immediately after Mahon's report was released, Chief Superintendent Brian Wilkinson and a small team of police officers were asked to investigate whether 'charges of conspiring to defeat the course of justice, and perjury' by employees of Air New Zealand could be sustained. Air New Zealand's board put 12 employees who had been witnesses at Mahon’s Inquiry on restricted duties on 3 May, because of 'potential safety factors' and the pressure they would be under during the police inquiry. After several months of investigation the police decided against charging anyone and the Air New Zealand staff members returned to normal duties.

Court action

In October 1981 the judicial review of the Inquiry's findings 'in the area of staff integrity' requested by Air New Zealand began in the Court of Appeal. These findings were challenged on the grounds that 'they were made unfairly, in disregard of natural justice and without jurisdiction'.

Gordon Vette

In June 1982 Captain Gordon Vette, who had given evidence that Air New Zealand had been at fault at the Royal Commission of Inquiry, resigned from the company. He regretted ending his time with the airline but was in an uncomfortable situation. 'There were a lot more casualties out of Erebus than those who died on the mountain'.

Delivering its judgement in December, the Court of Appeal noted that the proceedings were not related to the Inquiry's findings on the cause of the crash but to those on 'the conduct of certain officers of Air New Zealand'. It concluded that in this regard Mahon had breached natural justice by not allowing those he accused to respond to the allegations. It also found that he had acted outside his jurisdiction with the accusation of 'an orchestrated litany of lies'. His order of costs against the airline was quashed.

Mahon subsequently offered to resign from the High Court bench. His resignation was accepted by Cabinet in January 1982.

Following Mahon's resignation Ron Chippindale, the chief air accident investigator who had headed the original investigation into the crash, spoke out, asserting that Mahon's report ‘abounds in errors’. A report Chippindale had prepared for the Minister of Transport in response to Mahon's report in 1981 was released in February 1982. Chippindale argued:

My significant difference of opinion with the report of the Royal Commission is that the crew's assumption of where they were going was not sufficient excuse for descending without establishing their position as accurately as possible with the navigation aids available to them.

Principles of 'good airmanship' which obligated flight crews to fix their position before descending below the minimum safe altitude was an issue that had been raised by Air New Zealand previously. It was also raised by Sir Rochford Hughes, a retired Air Marshal of the Royal Air Force who provided technical assistance to the Inquiry. In February 1982 Rochford advised that he fundamentally supported Mahon's conclusions that organisational failure was to blame for the accident and that the briefing had given the wrong impression of the route. But he also argued that the pilot should not have implicitly trusted the aircraft's navigation system. He should have made a permanent fix before descending below the minimum safe altitude.

Despite his resignation Mahon decided to appeal to the Privy Council against the Court of Appeal's judgement and the government agreed to pay his costs. A four-week hearing was held in July 1983. In October the Privy Council 'very reluctantly' agreed with the Court of Appeal's judgements and dismissed Mahon's appeal. They also placed on record a tribute to the 'brilliant and painstaking investigative work done by the judge'.

In November 1987 a claim against the United States government on behalf of 16 of the crew members killed in the Erebus disaster was heard in the US over several days. This argued that US Navy air traffic controllers at McMurdo Station should have warned the flight crew that the aircraft was heading for Mt Erebus. In July 1988 the judge dismissed the case. He ruled that the air traffic controllers were not to blame for the crash, which 'was the fault of Air New Zealand and of the flight crew'.

Part of: Finding the cause

Next page: Ongoing debate over Erebus

Further information


Community contributions

No comments have been posted about Court action following Erebus disaster inquiry

What do you know?