A 20-year-old law student has triumphed over Auckland Transport in court, with a judge ruling that the installation of three speed bumps and a raised pedestrian crossing was unlawful.

Sean O’Loughlin took a case to the High Court at Auckland, arguing AT had failed to follow the law for the $667,000 works on The Parade at Little Bucklands Beach.

His case centred on the argument that AT focused on speed reduction and safety issues, skipping over the legal requirement to weigh the impact on drivers. The only speed-related crash, resulting in a minor injury, involved a public bus, he told the court.

Justice David Johnstone ruled in favour of the student, finding that AT hadn’t genuinely considered the impact on motorists.

In court, AT argued the decision to install the traffic calming measures was lawful, saying the measures were necessary, the agency had consulted, and the resolution to proceed was valid.

The raised pedestrian crossing located on The Parade, Bucklands Beach. 24 August 2025 New Zealand Herald photograph by Dean Purcell

An AT spokesman said it was unable to comment at this time as it was still considering the High Court decision.

O’Loughlin, a law student at the University of Auckland and long-time resident near The Parade, said his case was not about the speed humps themselves, but rather the process by which they were installed, and community opposition to them.

Following the installation of the speed bumps and pedestrian crossing in late 2024, O’Loughlin drew on his legal education to prepare and present his own case for a one-day judicial review in May.

He felt good about taking on AT at a young age and winning.

“There is a lot of public discourse around Auckland Transport, at least within my university friend group, and that is part of why I wanted to do this at my own cost. It is important to hold public decision makers accountable,” he said.

Law student Sean O'Loughlin at the pedestrian crossing at Little Bucklands Beach. Photo / Dean Purcell

O’Loughlin believed there were potentially wider ramifications from the ruling because AT had relied on a pre-written template claiming the changes would not “unduly impede vehicular traffic”, and did not give any reason behind that.

“You can go on the Auckland Transport website and see the template. It has all the paragraphs pre-written. It’s possible they use it to make other decisions,” he said.

Justice Johnstone noted that a report presented to AT’s traffic control committee contained pre-drafted resolutions - described as a “legal boilerplate” in the judgment.

The report asserted that the traffic calming measures would “not unduly impede vehicular traffic,” even though the rest of the report failed to address or analyse the issue, he said.

“The decision to install the raised crossing and speed humps was taken, and they were installed, without the existence of authorising power; this is, unlawfully,” the judge ruled.

AT was ordered to go back and reconsider the decision properly. If it found the measures did impede traffic, it would have to remove them. If not, they could stay.

One of the three speed bumps along The Landing at Little Bucklands Beach. Photo / Dean Purcell

Retired law professor Kenneth Palmer praised O’Loughlin’s efforts, saying he deserved an award for “taking on the big guns”.

Palmer said the ruling was an excellent decision, noting it correctly identified the legal basis for approving raised crossings. However, he anticipated AT would uphold its original stance and the crossings would remain in place.

Palmer expressed concern that AT had not seriously considered the legal test of “not unduly impede vehicular traffic”, instead justifying its decision primarily on safety grounds and the need to slow vehicles.

“The justification should now shift from personal safety to the impact on traffic. That’s what the law requires, and it’s been overlooked,” Palmer said. “Issues like vibration affecting nearby properties, noise, and trucks banging up and down have been treated as secondary.”

Retired law professor Kenneth Palmer.

He cited Mission Bay as an example, where four speed bumps were clustered within 200 metres, far more than necessary, in his view. He claimed a wide centre island also forced buses to crawl along the gutter.

“Vehicles are already being slowed down. Giving them another shake just seems ridiculous,” he added.

The $667,000 cost of three humps and a raised crossing comprised professional services and internal AT time charges during design work of $258,000; other professional services and AT time charges of $75,000; and construction, professional services, and internal AT time charges during the construction phase of $334,000. These costs were provided to the hearing by AT.