Capital Airport Group Pty Limited v Director-General of the Department of Planning [2009] NSWLEC 215

Capital Airport Group Pty Limited v Director-General of the Department of Planning [2009] NSWLEC 215

Although there was a serious question to be tried as to whether the draft LEP was a 'pending LEP' and whether the s 65 certificate was made in excess of power, the balance of convenience did not favour an interlocutory injunction because public exhibition and comment would not alter legal rights or duties, CAG would suffer no irreparable injury, public inconvenience was not significant, and the exhibition process might still have utility even if CAG ultimately succeeded. The appropriate course was to dismiss the injunction application and expedite the final hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Proceedings Seeking a Declaration and Interlocutory Injunction Concerning Public Exhibition of a Draft Local Environmental Plan / Interlocutory Application for Injunction; Ex Tempore Judgment; Final Hearing Expedited
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed; proceedings expedited; Canberra Estates Consortium No 4 Pty Limited joined as third respondent.
Legal Topics
['draft Local Environmental Plan' 'pending Lep' 'public Exhibition' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'serious Question to Be Tried' 'balance of Convenience' 'transitional and Savings Provisions']
['environmental Planning Law' 'administrative Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['draft Local Environmental Plan' 'pending Lep' 'public Exhibition' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'serious Question to Be Tried' 'balance of Convenience' 'transitional and Savings 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Proceedings Seeking a Declaration and Interlocutory Injunction Concerning Public Exhibition of a Draft Local Environmental Plan / Interlocutory Application for Injunction; Ex Tempore Judgment; Final Hearing Expedited

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether there was a serious question to be tried as to whether the draft LEP was a 'pending LEP' under cl 12(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000." "Whether there was a serious question to be tried as to whether the Director-General's s 65 certificate was made in excess of power." 'Whether the balance of convenience favoured granting an interlocutory injunction restraining public exhibition of the draft LEP.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although there was a serious question to be tried as to whether the draft LEP was a 'pending LEP' and whether the s 65 certificate was made in excess of power, the balance of convenience did not favour an interlocutory injunction because public exhibition and comment would not alter legal rights or duties, CAG would suffer no irreparable injury, public inconvenience was not significant, and the exhibition process might still have utility even if CAG ultimately succeeded. The appropriate course was to dismiss the injunction application and expedite the final hearing.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed; proceedings expedited; Canberra Estates Consortium No 4 Pty Limited joined as third respondent.

Orders

  • ['Canberra Estates Consortium No 4 Pty Limited is joined as the third respondent to the proceedings.' 'The application by the applicant for an interlocutory injunction made on 12 November 2009 is dismissed.' 'The proceedings are expedited.' 'The matter is fixed for hearing on 14 December 2009.' 'The first respondent...