References in periodicals archive ?
See also Perry & Ors v Hepburn Shire Council & Ors (2007) 154 LGERA 182 at 189.
See also Carruthers (n 98) (commission of inquiry); Murian Consulting Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Municipal Council (2009) 170 LGERA 162 (commissioners and judges distinguished).
(9) Gray v Minister for Planing (2006) 152 LGERA 258;  NSWLEC 720.
LGERA 78, 84, 88-9 (Priestley JA); Save Little Manly Beach Foreshore Inc
Pty Ltd (1999) 104 LGERA 9, 20-1  (actual knowledge); Amaca (2004)
(14 September 2004); Town of Mosman Park v Tait (2005) 141 LGERA 171;
(84) Environmental and planning cases where this argument was successful include: Enfield (2000) 199 CLR 135; Timbarra Protection Coalition (1999) 46 NSWLR 55; Gales Holdings Pty Ltd v Tweed Shire Council (1999) 110 LGERA 235; Woolworths v Pallas Newco (2004) 61 NSWLR 707; Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc v Newcastle City Council (2010) 179 LGERA 346; Fullerton Cove Residents Action Group Inc v Dart Energy Ltd [No 2] (2013) 195 LGERA 229.
Western Australia's Court of Appeal took the same view in Neilson v City of Swan (2006) 147 LGERA 136, 158-9  (Buss JA, Wheeler and Pullin JJA agreeing).
See also Schwennes en v Minister for Environment and Resource Management (2010) 176 LGERA 1, 14, where White J accepted that a range of factors were relevant in determining the character of a decision but concluded that the issue was ultimately 'a matter for judgment and no single factor is determinative.'
Cf Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Redmore Pty Ltd (1989) 166 CLR 454, 457-60 (Mason C J, Deane and Gaudron JJ); Tonkin v Cooma-Monaro Shire Council (2006) 145 LGERA 48, 57-64 (Ipp JA).
(12) See, eg, Gray v Minister for Planning (2006) 152 LGERA 258, 287 (Pain J) ('Anvil Hill'); Walker v Minister for Planning (2007) 157 LGERA 124, 192 (Biscoe J) ('Walker').
For example, in the case of Minister for the Environment and Heritage v Greentree [No 3] (2004) 136 LGERA 89, a prosecution of a farmer for taking a controlled action affecting a Ramsar wetland site without approval resulted in the imposition of a total fine of $450 000.
Acronyms browser ?
Full browser ?