On Wednesday, the ministry gave the school an ultimatum - establish an enrolment scheme by August 7 or it would appoint a limited statutory manager to take control of the school.
King's board of trustees said it was refusing to establish an enrolment zone, and would challenge the ministry's appointment of a limited statutory manager (LSM) because it did not believe the school was overcrowded.
The board said it had taken legal advice, and believed it was in a strong position to decline the ministry's request.
Asked to comment on the developing stand-off between the ministry and King's, University of Otago public law lecturer Marcelo Rodriguez-Ferrere said it appeared the ministry had the upper hand.
''My view on this is that I'm really unsure as to how the King's High School board of trustees could think it could resist directions from the Secretary for Education.
''Boards have really wide powers, as shown in schedule 6 of the Education Act 1989, but section 11G(2) of the Act says that schools must comply with instructions by the Secretary for Education relating to enrolment schemes.
''Now, there's a chance, maybe, that the secretary/ministry has been acting in a way that the school thinks is inappropriate, and thus challengeable in law.
''But if that's the case, we'd need to know their reasons for these thoughts before we could assess the validity of any challenge.
''Short answer, without more information, I'm shadow-boxing here, but the Act certainly seems fairly clear in terms of the ministry's over-riding power on this.''
To date, the King's board of trustees has kept tight-lipped about its legal advice.
Mr Rodriguez-Ferrere said if the ministry/secretary had made a decision based on the wrong facts or incorrect in law, the school might have ''a leg to stand on'' and might have grounds to seek a judicial review of the ministry's decision.
''Depending upon how the secretary determined and came to the conclusion that there was, or likely to be, overcrowding at the school, if there are clear reasons as to why the secretary is fundamentally mistaken in that or has for some reason taken into account irrelevant considerations when coming to that conclusion, or otherwise misdirected themself in law when coming to that conclusion; then it may be the school has a leg to stand on.
''My main concern would be that it is a really easy test to meet from the perspective of the ministry, because all they need to know is whether there is, or likely to be, overcrowding - and that's such a subjective measure.''
Mr Rodriguez-Ferrere said if the ministry had a clear process for determining exactly when a school was overcrowded, then that was all that was required to be satisfied.
''I would definitely expect there to be some sort of calculation that they do.
''And it doesn't necessarily matter that the school disagrees as to what the definition is of overcrowding.
''If the secretary has come to a reasonable conclusion that it is going to be overcrowded, then that is the end of the matter.''