▁A pa ▁v ▁Att orney - General , ▁amongst ▁other ▁matters , ▁that : ▁▁ ▁" The ▁definition ▁of ▁' land ' ▁in ▁Te ▁T ure ▁When ua ▁Ma ori ▁Act ▁ 1 9 9 3 ▁did ▁not ▁necessarily ▁exclude ▁for esh ore ▁and ▁se ab ed "; ▁ ▁" The ▁title ▁v ested ▁in ▁the ▁Crown ▁was ▁radical ▁title ▁which ▁was ▁not ▁incons istent ▁with ▁native ▁title "; ▁ ▁Vari ous ▁Act s ▁had ▁influence ▁over ▁but ▁did ▁not ▁ex ting u ish ▁property ▁rights ; ▁ ▁The ▁Ma ori ▁Land ▁Court ▁had ▁juris diction ▁to ▁determine ▁" an ▁investigation ▁of ▁the ▁title ▁to ▁the ▁land ▁... ▁under ▁s ▁ 1 3 2 ▁and ▁an ▁order ▁determ ining ▁the ▁relative ▁interests ▁of ▁the ▁own ers ▁of ▁the ▁land ". ▁ ▁In ▁Re ▁the ▁Nin ety - M ile ▁Beach ▁▁ ▁The ▁Court ▁of ▁App e al ▁over turn ed ▁a ▁line ▁of ▁preced ent ▁d ating ▁back ▁to ▁the ▁ 1 8 7 7 ▁decision ▁in ▁Wi ▁Par ata ▁v ▁Bishop ▁of ▁Well ington , ▁and ▁aff ir med ▁by ▁the ▁New ▁Zealand ▁Court ▁of ▁App e al ▁in ▁the ▁ 1 9 6 3 ▁Nin ety ▁M ile ▁Beach ▁decision . ▁These ▁early ▁dec isions ▁held ▁that ▁because ▁of ▁circumstances ▁unique ▁to ▁New ▁Zealand , ▁M ā ori ▁land ▁t ies ▁were ▁so ▁weak ▁that ▁they ▁could ▁be ▁ex ting u ished ▁through ▁such ▁indirect ▁routes ▁as ▁un related ▁phr ases ▁in ▁legisl ation ▁or ▁through ▁the ▁Native ▁( now ▁M