Judge John Hassan
BA, LLB, University of Otago
Sponsored by Wynn Williams
Judge Hassan was born in Invercargill. He was appointed to the Environment Court and District Court in 2013 and is based in Christchurch. Shortly after his appointment, he served as Deputy Chair of the Independent Hearings Panel for the post-earthquakes’ Christchurch Replacement District Plan.
Over recent years, his Environment Court roster has been largely in the Queenstown, Central Otago, Mackenzie, Nelson and Marlborough areas.
Judge Hassan has significant law reform and other public sector experience. Initially, that was as in-house solicitor for the Ministry of Works and Development in Dunedin. Following a move to the Ministry for the Environment in Wellington, he worked on the Resource Management Law Reform, under both Labour and National administrations, in policy and instructing solicitor roles. He was legal adviser to the Randerson Review Group and principal instructing solicitor to Parliamentary Counsel on the enactment of the Resource Management Act 1991.
Judge Hassan was a partner at law firm Chapman Tripp for approximately 17 years, specialising in resource management and environmental law. His clients included infrastructure providers, the Crown and government agencies, property developers, large and SME industries, local government and community groups. He was part of a Ministerial advisory panel on RMA reforms and was appointed by the Local Government and Environment Select Committee to audit the drafting of the Resource Management Amendment Act 2009.
Environment Judge John Hassan considers how the Planning and Natural
Environment Acts 2026 could reshape environmental enforcement practices and
outcomes. He argues that public confidence in environmental law depends on
principled enforcement discretion, meaningful access to justice for people harmed
by pollution, and outcomes that communities see as putting right environmental
damage and restoring balance in our relationships with te Taiao. Reflecting on the
Resource Management Act, he asks what lessons we can take from its failure to
consistently provide for restorative environmental justice through processes that
were properly informed by the victims of environmental harm.
The address explores whether expanded Environment Court remedies and
participation rights under the new legislation can deliver what communities,
including victims, will recognise as restorative justice. He considers how the
principled exercise of environmental discretion will influence that, including in
matters where the Treaty of Waitangi |Te Tiriti o Waitangi speaks.
Judge Hassan asks that we record that, while his perspectives are informed by his
experience on the bench, they are offered as personal perspectives to invite
thinking, not in a judicial capacity nor necessarily representing any view of the
Court.