Residents Against Improper Development Incorporated & Anor v Chase Property Investments Pty Ltd [2006] NSWCA 323

Residents Against Improper Development Incorporated & Anor v Chase Property Investments Pty Ltd [2006] NSWCA 323

Clause 10.8(e) of the Local Environmental Plan operates as a development standard and is amenable to objection under SEPP1; 'Designated development' under the regulation includes any development application involving a category listed in Schedule 3 regardless of whether it is ancillary; Development Application No X05/0412 is in respect of designated development and thus requires an environmental impact statement, making its consent void for non-compliance; costs in proceedings before Pain J should follow the event, as the proceedings had the character of ordinary litigation rather than merits review.

Parties
First Appellant: Residents Against Improper Development Incorporated; Second Appellant: Blue Mountains City Council; Respondent: Chase Property Investments Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Development Standards, Designated Development, Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, Costs in Land and Environment Court, Legal Characterisation of Development, Statutory Interpretation
Administrative Law Planning and Environment Law Local Government Law Development Standards Designated Development Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Costs in Land and Environment Court Legal Characterisation of Development +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 45 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Residents Against Improper Development Incorporated

First Appellant

Blue Mountains City Council

Second Appellant

Chase Property Investments Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 10.8(e) of the Local Environmental Plan is a 'development standard' under s4(1) Environmental Planning and Assessment Act
  2. 2 Whether Development Application No X05/0412 is designated development under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
  3. 3 Proper approach to characterising designated development under Schedule 3 of the Regulation

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 10.8(e) of the Local Environmental Plan operates as a development standard and is amenable to objection under SEPP1; 'Designated development' under the regulation includes any development application involving a category listed in Schedule 3 regardless of whether it is ancillary; Development Application No X05/0412 is in respect of designated development and thus requires an environmental impact statement, making its consent void for non-compliance; costs in proceedings before Pain J should follow the event, as the proceedings had the character of ordinary litigation rather than merits review.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Extend time for first appellant to file summons for leave to appeal up to 17 October 2006
  • Grant leave to appeal regarding Pain J's decision of 23 August 2005