Burwood Council v Matthews [2013] NSWLEC 23

Burwood Council v Matthews [2013] NSWLEC 23

Mr Matthews was convicted and fined for development without consent and failing to comply with a stop work order, the offences being strict liability but assessed as deliberate and negligent/reckless respectively, with penalties appropriately reduced for mitigating factors and financial capacity pursuant to relevant sentencing statutes and principles.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Class 5 Proceedings – Criminal (environmental) / Sentencing Judgment
Outcome
Conviction and fines imposed; costs order made.
Legal Topics
['development Without Consent' 'failure to Comply With Stop Work Order' 'sentencing Principles' 'strict Liability Offences' 'consideration of Financial Circumstances' 'totality Principle' 'general and Specific Deterrence' 'costs Orders']
['environmental Law' 'criminal Law'] ['development Without Consent' 'failure to Comply With Stop Work Order' 'sentencing Principles' 'strict Liability Offences' 'consideration of Financial Circumstances' 'totality Principle' 'general and Specific Deterrence' 'costs Orders']

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

Class 5 Proceedings – Criminal (environmental) / Sentencing Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Matthews committed development without consent' 'Whether Mr Matthews failed to comply with a stop work order issued under s 121B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979' 'Appropriate sentence for offences under Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 s 125(1)']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Matthews was convicted and fined for development without consent and failing to comply with a stop work order, the offences being strict liability but assessed as deliberate and negligent/reckless respectively, with penalties appropriately reduced for mitigating factors and financial capacity pursuant to relevant sentencing statutes and principles.

Court Disposition

Conviction and fines imposed; costs order made.

Orders

  • ['Mr Matthews is convicted of both offences as charged.' 'In respect of the first charge Mr Matthews is fined the sum of $13,400.' 'In respect of the second charge Mr Matthews is fined the sum of $6,700.' "Mr Matthews is to pay the prosecutor's costs of the proceedings fixed in the sum of $9,000 (inclusive of GST)."...