Stories of an "underground city" beneath North Head at Devonport have been relegated to the realms of myth and fantasy by the Chief Justice, Dame Sian Elias.
Her findings in a recent judgment are a blow for film-maker John Earnshaw, a passionate seeker of sealed-up tunnels reputedly containing vintage aircraft, including the first Boeing plane - the so-called Boeing One.
"Naturally, I am very disappointed," he said yesterday.
"This has taken up a large chunk of my life."
During a 10-day trial in the High Court at Auckland, the Chief Justice heard evidence from 40 people before deciding whether she believed the tales of long-forgotten passages hiding ancient military hardware.
The hearing was the most comprehensive inquiry into whether the persistent rumours surrounding the old fort have any substance.
Some witnesses described large storage areas within North Head, as well as accommodation and hospital facilities.
Some said they had seen aircraft, rifles, ammunition and military vehicles.
Others said they saw tunnels being deliberately blocked and subsequently concealed.
Some witnesses referred to now-lost plans of North Head recording layers of inter-connecting tunnels.
Dame Sian said many witnesses relied on childhood memories of more than 50 years ago, were involved in the public speculation, were confused, had brief glimpses or distorted perception. Others had clearly exaggerated.
"Suggestions of an underground city and of fully assembled aircraft sitting in tunnels are, I am satisfied, tricks of memory, perhaps fuelled by the constant speculations about tunnels and aircraft under North Head."
The judge did not accept claims of a conspiracy between the military and the Department of Conservation.
While she did not intend any reflection on witnesses, she concluded that Mr Earnshaw and his film company, Mallard Productions, had failed to show on the balance of probabilities that there were tunnels and military artefacts hidden below North Head.
Mallard Productions had claimed $1.028 million (later reduced to $450,000) from the Secretary of Defence for lost opportunity to film the search for the rumoured tunnels, aircraft and vehicles.
In addition, Mr Earnshaw claimed 50 per cent of the value of two Boeings or parts, three other aircraft or parts, jeeps, various other military vehicles, 1000 M1 carbines, 1000 Lee-Enfield rifles, 30 to 36 Martini-Henry rifles, and 100,000 rounds of ammunition said to be worth $13.5 million.
He also claimed $44,000 loss of income.
But Dame Sian awarded only nominal damages of $100 each to Mallard and Mr Earnshaw.
At a previous trial in 1996, Dame Sian had ruled that the Crown was in breach of a 1987 agreement to help find the tunnels and excavate them.
However, she said at the time that whether this breach caused loss to the plaintiffs would have to be addressed at a second trial, held last August.
In her latest decision, Dame Sian said it was essential for Mr Earnshaw to prove there was a complex of tunnels containing the equipment he outlined in his statement of claim, and that the defendant's breach of contract had caused him to lose the opportunity to discover the tunnel and the items.
"The plaintiffs' eyewitness accounts do not persuade me that there are forgotten tunnels under North Head," she said.
She accepted that Mallard would have made a film of the search, but the loss claimed was more than just the loss of opportunity to make a film.
"It is based upon the loss of the chance to make a marketable film, one of value," said Dame Sian.
The Secretary of Defence had maintained that the plaintiffs suffered no loss because there were no hidden tunnels and no missing aircraft or military equipment.
After exhaustive archival investigation and a number of physical examinations of the site, there were no unknown concealed tunnels, said the defence.
Any planes had been destroyed and vehicles, weapons and ammunition once stored at North Head had been removed when the Army left the fort in the 1960s.
The defence said its assertions that there were no concealed tunnels were supported by excavation and investigation made by DoC between 1992 and 1994 "in the face of persistent public speculation."
The Chief Justice reserved the question of costs.
