Blacktown City Council v The Penatrators Pty Limited (No 3) [2014] NSWLEC 4
The Penatrators Pty Limited carried out unauthorised development on the Hamilton Street Land for a waste disposal facility, which was prohibited under the applicable planning instrument and breached s 76B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and carried out development on the Melbourne Road Land for a waste or resource management facility without consent, breaching s 76A. Because the evidence established The Penatrators Pty Limited, rather than Michael Galainy personally or Riverstone Waste Transfer Pty Ltd, as the person in breach, restraining, removal and costs orders were made only against The Penatrators Pty Limited and the proceedings against the other respondents...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 04 February 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Class 4 Civil Enforcement Proceedings to Restrain Unlawful Depositing of Waste Building Materials and Require Removal / Final Hearing; Ex Tempore Principal Judgment
- Outcome
- Relief granted against the first respondent in both proceedings; proceedings dismissed against the other respondents.
- Legal Topics
- ['development Without Consent' 'prohibited Development' 'waste Disposal Facility' 'waste or Resource Management Facility' 'waste or Resource Transfer Station' 'restraining Orders Under S 124 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979' 'removal of Waste Materials']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Civil Enforcement Proceedings to Restrain Unlawful Depositing of Waste Building Materials and Require Removal / Final Hearing; Ex Tempore Principal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the depositing and storage of building and demolition waste on the Hamilton Street Land was prohibited development or development requiring consent that had not been obtained.' 'Whether the depositing and storage of building and demolition waste on the Melbourne Road Land was development requiring consent that had not been obtained.' 'Whether The Penatrators Pty Limited was the person carrying out the unlawful activities on both parcels of land.' 'Whether final orders should be made against Michael Galainy or Riverstone Waste Transfer Pty Ltd.']
Ratio Decidendi
The Penatrators Pty Limited carried out unauthorised development on the Hamilton Street Land for a waste disposal facility, which was prohibited under the applicable planning instrument and breached s 76B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and carried out development on the Melbourne Road Land for a waste or resource management facility without consent, breaching s 76A. Because the evidence established The Penatrators Pty Limited, rather than Michael Galainy personally or Riverstone Waste Transfer Pty Ltd, as the person in breach, restraining, removal and costs orders were made only against The Penatrators Pty Limited and the proceedings against the other respondents...
Court Disposition
Relief granted against the first respondent in both proceedings; proceedings dismissed against the other respondents.
Orders
- ['In proceedings 13/40699, declaration that the first respondent carried out development for the purposes of a waste disposal facility at Lot 23, Lot 24 and Lot 25 Section 47 in DP 1480 at Hamilton Street Vineyard in breach of s 76B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' 'In proceedings 13/40699,...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment