On October 15, 2026, New Zealand’s High Court dismissed Peter Goodricke’s application for judicial review over Tesla’s charging restrictions on two repaired Model 3s. The court ordered him to pay NZ$26,827 in costs and NZ$257.40 in disbursements, a combined NZ$27,084.40.
Judicial review examines a decision made by a lower body; it does not retry the underlying dispute. The High Court ruled on Goodricke’s challenge to the Disputes Tribunal’s decision, which had dismissed his consumer-law claim.
Why passing inspection did not restore fast charging
Goodricke bought two written-off Tesla Model 3s, repaired them and passed the inspection required to re-register them. Tesla had classified the cars as unsupported after New Zealand Transport Agency records listed them as structurally damaged. It sent software updates disabling DC fast charging, which took effect when Goodricke connected the cars through the Tesla app.
Tesla sent the first update on August 26, 2024, and the second on September 3. The second car’s update took effect on October 30, 2024; the first car’s took effect on January 29, 2025.
The two inspections served different purposes in Goodricke’s case:
| Inspection | Purpose | Result in Goodricke’s case |
| Re-registration inspection | Required for the repaired cars to be re-registered | Both cars passed, but DC fast charging remained disabled |
| Tesla dealership inspection offer | Assess whether Tesla would consider fast charging safe | Tesla offered an inspection for NZ$1,624.43 per car; restoring charging depended on Tesla’s safety assessment |
Passing the re-registration inspection did not restore Supercharging. The restriction also covered third-party DC fast-charging networks. The cars could still charge from an ordinary power outlet, a process the judgment said could take days.
Tesla’s stated safety rationale was that damage to a high-voltage battery can create a fire risk and that internal damage may be difficult to detect. The judgment did not find that either of Goodricke’s batteries was damaged.
What the High Court decided
Justice David Boldt dismissed the application for judicial review, finding that Goodricke’s arguments sought to reopen the merits of the Tribunal’s decision. The High Court did not hear the consumer dispute afresh, and the judge was not persuaded that the cars ceased to be of acceptable quality after Tesla’s updates.
The court ordered NZ$26,827 in costs payable to Tesla, plus NZ$257.40 in disbursements. The total was NZ$27,084.40.
The judge’s qualification on Tesla’s policy
Justice Boldt said publishing a policy on a website alone did not entitle Tesla to restrict charging when the company and vehicle owner had no contractual relationship. The judgment recorded that the parties agreed Goodricke had to accept Tesla’s terms to use the app, but the court did not resolve the legal effect of those terms.
