FAST BUCK$ v BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL [1999] NSWCA 19

FAST BUCK$ v BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL [1999] NSWCA 19

The assessor did not err in law. The objectives of the Rural 1(a) zoning and the purposes of the subdivision development standard were relevant to whether compliance would be unreasonable or unnecessary; the assessor implicitly determined and rejected the SEPP 1 objection in the circumstances of the appellant's land; and the Council's pending rural residential study and the desirability of maintaining present planning controls were relevant considerations in the exercise of the planning discretion. The appeal was therefore dismissed with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 February 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal by Leave From the Land and Environment Court Concerning Refusal of Development Consent for Subdivision / Court of Appeal Determination of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['error of Law' 'irrelevant Considerations' 'state Environmental Planning Policy No 1' 'development Standards' 'subdivision Consent' 'rural Zoning']
['administrative Law' 'environmental Planning'] ['error of Law' 'irrelevant Considerations' 'state Environmental Planning Policy No 1' 'development Standards' 'subdivision Consent' 'rural Zoning']

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

Appeal by Leave From the Land and Environment Court Concerning Refusal of Development Consent for Subdivision / Court of Appeal Determination of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the assessor erred in law by failing to make a finding on whether the SEPP 1 objection was well founded.' 'Whether the assessor asked the wrong question by considering whether the development standard was unreasonable or unnecessary rather than whether compliance with it would be unreasonable or unnecessary.' 'Whether the assessor misconstrued the objectives of the Rural 1(a) zone in the Byron Local Environmental Plan 1988.' "Whether the assessor took into account an irrelevant consideration by considering the Council's pending rural residential study."]

Ratio Decidendi

The assessor did not err in law. The objectives of the Rural 1(a) zoning and the purposes of the subdivision development standard were relevant to whether compliance would be unreasonable or unnecessary; the assessor implicitly determined and rejected the SEPP 1 objection in the circumstances of the appellant's land; and the Council's pending rural residential study and the desirability of maintaining present planning controls were relevant considerations in the exercise of the planning discretion. The appeal was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']