IRON GATES PTY LTD v OSHLACK and ANOR [1998] NSWCA 111

IRON GATES PTY LTD v OSHLACK and ANOR [1998] NSWCA 111

No successful challenge was made to the findings of primary fact by Stein J that there were substantial breaches of the conditions of the development consent and of relevant statutory obligations; the evidence supported the findings of extensive clearing and damage to habitat, and knowledge of the developer as required under s118D; discretionary orders, including remediation and injunctions, were justified and should not be disturbed.

Parties
Appellant: Iron Gates Pty Ltd; First Respondent: Oshlack; Second Respondent: Richmond River Shire Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 February 1998
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision (from Land and Environment Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Development Consent, Breach of Conditions, Remediation Orders, Damage to Habitat, Injunctions
Environmental Law Planning Law Development Consent Breach of Conditions Remediation Orders Damage to Habitat Injunctions

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Iron Gates Pty Ltd

Appellant

Oshlack

First Respondent

Richmond River Shire Council

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision (from Land and Environment Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the development was carried out in breach of conditions of development consent under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
  2. 2 Whether there was damage to the habitat of threatened species in contravention of s118D of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974
  3. 3 Whether the findings of fact by the primary judge (Stein J) should be overturned

Ratio Decidendi

No successful challenge was made to the findings of primary fact by Stein J that there were substantial breaches of the conditions of the development consent and of relevant statutory obligations; the evidence supported the findings of extensive clearing and damage to habitat, and knowledge of the developer as required under s118D; discretionary orders, including remediation and injunctions, were justified and should not be disturbed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Costs awarded against the appellant.