Ku-Ring-Gai Municipal Council v Beaini [2001] NSWLEC 30

Ku-Ring-Gai Municipal Council v Beaini [2001] NSWLEC 30

Where a tree preservation order includes an express declaration of the penalty for contravention, that penalty is the maximum prescribed for the offence, rather than the general maximum penalty under s 126(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Parties
Prosecutor: Ku-Ring-Gai Municipal Council; Defendant: Beaini, Buddy
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
maximum penalty for offence is $20,000 as expressly imposed by the Tree Preservation Order
Legal Topics
Tree Preservation Order, Maximum Penalty, Interpretation of Penalty Provisions
Environmental Law Criminal Law Tree Preservation Order Maximum Penalty Interpretation of Penalty Provisions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ku-Ring-Gai Municipal Council

Prosecutor

Beaini, Buddy

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the maximum penalty prescribed for an offence of contravention of the Ku-Ring-Gai Council's Tree Preservation Order under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, s 126(1)?

Ratio Decidendi

Where a tree preservation order includes an express declaration of the penalty for contravention, that penalty is the maximum prescribed for the offence, rather than the general maximum penalty under s 126(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Court Disposition

maximum penalty for offence is $20,000 as expressly imposed by the Tree Preservation Order

Orders

  • The maximum penalty for the admitted offence is $20,000 as declared in the Tree Preservation Order.