Cordina Chicken Farms Pty Ltd v Attard Racing Pty Ltd [2015] NSWLEC 108

Cordina Chicken Farms Pty Ltd v Attard Racing Pty Ltd [2015] NSWLEC 108

It was open to the Council's decision-maker to conclude, on the available material, that both s 96(1A) tests—minimal environmental impact and 'substantially the same development'—were satisfied in granting the modification of development consent to include poultry slaughtering. Declarations would be made that the Lairage and Offal Tower were unlawfully erected structures requiring consent, but restraining orders on their use would be suspended for 8 weeks due to social impacts, to allow consideration of building certificate applications.

Parties
Applicant: Cordina Chicken Farms Pty Ltd; First Respondent: Attard Racing Pty Ltd; Second Respondent: Supreme Poultry & Chickens Pty Ltd; Third Respondent: Gosford City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review and Civil Enforcement / Final Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Application for judicial review and permanent restraint dismissed; declarations and orders made in respect of unapproved structures, with suspended enforcement.
Legal Topics
Modification of Development Consent, Environmental Impact Assessment, Judicial Review of Administrative Action, Civil Enforcement, Unapproved Structures, Discretionary Relief
Environmental Law Administrative Law Planning Law Modification of Development Consent Environmental Impact Assessment Judicial Review of Administrative Action Civil Enforcement Unapproved Structures +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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cordina Chicken Farms Pty Ltd

Applicant

Attard Racing Pty Ltd

First Respondent

Supreme Poultry & Chickens Pty Ltd

Second Respondent

Gosford City Council

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review and Civil Enforcement / Final Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it was manifestly unreasonable for the Council to conclude the modification was of minimal environmental impact under s 96(1A)(a) Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
  2. 2 Whether it was manifestly unreasonable for the Council to conclude the modified development was substantially the same development as originally approved under s 96(1A)(b)
  3. 3 Whether declarations and restraining orders should be granted regarding use of structures (Lairage and Offal Tower) erected without development consent

Ratio Decidendi

It was open to the Council's decision-maker to conclude, on the available material, that both s 96(1A) tests—minimal environmental impact and 'substantially the same development'—were satisfied in granting the modification of development consent to include poultry slaughtering. Declarations would be made that the Lairage and Offal Tower were unlawfully erected structures requiring consent, but restraining orders on their use would be suspended for 8 weeks due to social impacts, to allow consideration of building certificate applications.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review and permanent restraint dismissed; declarations and orders made in respect of unapproved structures, with suspended enforcement.

Orders

  • Declare that Attard and Supreme erected the Lairage and Offal Tower without development consent in breach of s 76A Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
  • Order that Attard and Supreme are restrained from using the Lairage and Offal Tower for livestock processing industry purposes, but such restraint is suspended until 5.00pm on 9 September 2015