If the government hadn't lost last week in the Borrowdale case, I wouldn't be paying the attention I am to Greymouth Gas taking Megan Woods and the government to court.

The clue in the Borrowdale case, which seemed a great deal more complex than the gas case, was that after nine days they changed the bit of writing on the paper. In other words, someone, somewhere worked out they might be in trouble so put a bit of ink in place to seemingly patch up the gaps.

We now know that was because the opening stanza was unlawful. It's a shame, in many respects, the case didn’t get the coverage it deserved. And it failed to do so because,  we were preoccupied with a border cock up and a decent chunk of the country locked down due to a government that couldn’t deliver a pizza, far less a pandemic plan. And sadly, the media don’t have a large number of senior practitioners any more than understand law as well as they should …having been in court a few times over the years very little is as it seems

The simple gets quickly complicated and the slam dunk argument often has a nuance mainly missed by those merely seeking a headline grab. And, as such, often the decisions aren't actually all that cut and dry as well.

In the Borrowdale case, for example, yes, the government acted unlawfully but in the end, what tangible outworkings were there? None, apart from humiliation.

The gas case, on its first flush, seems very simple indeed.

Can you make an announcement to ban something and then enact that decision without actually changing the law? The answer would seem to be, no.

And pretending to enact it, as is the claim, for a full seven months until the law is changed seems a fairly open and shut case. If it does play out this way, if in fact Greymouth are right and the government lose again, what does that say about the government? Is it inept? Or so arrogant they didn’t think they needed to change laws because they were above the law? Did they never consider their actions might lead to harm for business and therefore they would be surprised if anyone questioned their stance?

Can a government think they can simply go about making any old decisions they want, hurting whoever they want, without any due regard for what parliament is actually there for? That's making laws.

The devil will be in the detail. But losing once is bad enough, losing twice would surely give even the most ardent supporter pause for thought. Can a single government really be that bad at the basics, twice?