Bazeley v Hawkesbury Shire Council [1989] NSWLEC 207

Bazeley v Hawkesbury Shire Council [1989] NSWLEC 207

The Assessor's reasons, read in context and by clear inference, revealed that the appellant bore the onus and had not satisfied the Assessor, applying the stated legal principles, that the land was used wholly or mainly for the business of orcharding or grazing. The reasons did not deny the principle that justice must be seen to be done, and the absent findings of fact did not involve a legal standard. The applicant therefore did not establish a failure to give reasons sufficient to amount to an error of law.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 June 1989
Procedural Posture
Appeal Pursuant to S.56 a of the Land and Environment Court Act Against an Assessor's Decision Dismissing a Rural Rating Appeal Under S.118(7) of the Local Government Act / Appeal From Assessor's Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; Assessor's order confirmed.
Legal Topics
['rural Rating Appeal' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'error of Law' 'rural Land Use for Orcharding or Grazing']
['land and Environment Law' 'local Government Law' 'administrative Law'] ['rural Rating Appeal' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'error of Law' 'rural Land Use for Orcharding or Grazing']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal Pursuant to S.56 a of the Land and Environment Court Act Against an Assessor's Decision Dismissing a Rural Rating Appeal Under S.118(7) of the Local Government Act / Appeal From Assessor's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Assessor erred in law by failing to give any or any adequate reasons for dismissing the rural rating appeal.' "Whether the Assessor's reasons sufficiently revealed the ground for the finding that the land was not used wholly or mainly for the business of orcharding or grazing."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Assessor's reasons, read in context and by clear inference, revealed that the appellant bore the onus and had not satisfied the Assessor, applying the stated legal principles, that the land was used wholly or mainly for the business of orcharding or grazing. The reasons did not deny the principle that justice must be seen to be done, and the absent findings of fact did not involve a legal standard. The applicant therefore did not establish a failure to give reasons sufficient to amount to an error of law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; Assessor's order confirmed.

Orders

  • ["Time for appeal extended to 23 December 1988 to permit the appellant to appeal from the Assessor's decision." "The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the oral motion to extend the time for appeal." 'The appeal is dismissed with costs.' 'The order made by the Assessor is confirmed.']