Karl Heinz Singman v. Bruce Kerr Pty Limited [1988] NSWLEC 167

Karl Heinz Singman v. Bruce Kerr Pty Limited [1988] NSWLEC 167

The Assessor's decision in proceedings No.10291 of 1985, made under s.34(3)(b)(ii) of the Land and Environment Court Act, was a decision of the Court, exercised a judicial function, and was final and conclusive except as provided by Division 2 of Part V. The Land and Environment Court had no statutory or inherent power in these proceedings to reopen or review that regularly concluded decision, so the material concerning what the Assessor considered was irrelevant.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 March 1988
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Proceedings Concerning the Lawfulness of Subdivision Filling Works / Judgment Dismissing Application After Objection to Evidence Was Upheld
Outcome
Application dismissed; applicant ordered to pay the respondents' costs.
Legal Topics
['finality of Land and Environment Court Decisions' "assessor's Power to Dispose of Proceedings" 'admissibility and Relevance of Evidence' 'subdivision Development Consent' 'filling and Drainage Works']
['environmental Planning and Assessment' 'land and Environment Court Procedure' 'civil Enforcement'] ['finality of Land and Environment Court Decisions' "assessor's Power to Dispose of Proceedings" 'admissibility and Relevance of Evidence' 'subdivision Development Consent' 'filling and Drainage Works']

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 4 Proceedings Concerning the Lawfulness of Subdivision Filling Works / Judgment Dismissing Application After Objection to Evidence Was Upheld

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a decision of an Assessor under s.34(3)(b)(ii) of the Land and Environment Court Act is administrative or judicial.' "Whether the Land and Environment Court in Class 4 proceedings has jurisdiction to reopen or review an Assessor's decision disposing of Class 1 proceedings." 'Whether evidence about the adequacy of material considered by the Council and the Assessor was relevant to any justiciable issue.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Assessor's decision in proceedings No.10291 of 1985, made under s.34(3)(b)(ii) of the Land and Environment Court Act, was a decision of the Court, exercised a judicial function, and was final and conclusive except as provided by Division 2 of Part V. The Land and Environment Court had no statutory or inherent power in these proceedings to reopen or review that regularly concluded decision, so the material concerning what the Assessor considered was irrelevant.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; applicant ordered to pay the respondents' costs.

Orders

  • ['Application dismissed.' 'Exhibits may be released.' 'The applicant to pay the costs of the respondents.']