GWH Buildings Pty Limited v Great Lakes City Council [2004] NSWLEC 557
The reports of the court-appointed experts are adopted, establishing that the proposed development would result in significant adverse economic impacts for Karuah and Bulahdelah, with threatened community facilities and job losses not offset by the development, and concerns regarding threatened species warranting a species impact statement; thus the appeal is dismissed and the development application is refused.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 August 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed; development application refused
- Legal Topics
- ['development Application' 'threatened Species' 'economic Impact' 'public Interest']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the reports of the court experts should be adopted' 'Whether development should be permitted having regard to economic and social impacts' 'Whether a species impact statement is required due to presence of threatened species']
Ratio Decidendi
The reports of the court-appointed experts are adopted, establishing that the proposed development would result in significant adverse economic impacts for Karuah and Bulahdelah, with threatened community facilities and job losses not offset by the development, and concerns regarding threatened species warranting a species impact statement; thus the appeal is dismissed and the development application is refused.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed; development application refused
Orders
- ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'The development application is refused.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment