Parry v Andrews [2019] NSWLEC 86

Parry v Andrews [2019] NSWLEC 86

The appeal failed because reclamation work in s 198A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 is a broad statutory concept that is not limited to accretion or advancement into water land and is not to be construed as the converse of dredging work. On that construction, the construction of the retaining wall involved using materials to fill in and reclaim water land, and the construction of the concrete boat ramp involved filling in water land. The evidence before the Local Court was sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the works were reclamation work, and the magistrate's findings did not depend impermissibly on Mr Parry's admissions about needing a permit.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 6 Appeal From Local Court Convictions for Offences Against S 201(1) of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Convictions; Appeal Determined
Outcome
Leave to appeal against the convictions was granted, but the appeal was dismissed and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
['reclamation Work Without Permit' 'water Land' 'construction of Retaining Wall and Concrete Boat Ramp' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'costs of Appeal']
['environmental Law' 'criminal Law' 'fisheries Law' 'statutory Interpretation'] ['reclamation Work Without Permit' 'water Land' 'construction of Retaining Wall and Concrete Boat Ramp' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'costs of Appeal']

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 6 Appeal From Local Court Convictions for Offences Against S 201(1) of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Convictions; Appeal Determined

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether it was in the interests of justice to grant leave to appeal against the Local Court convictions.' 'Whether the term "reclamation work" in s 198A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 requires accretion or advancement on water land or is the converse of dredging work.' 'Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that construction of the retaining wall and concrete boat ramp involved reclamation work.' 'Whether the magistrate impermissibly relied on admissions by Mr Parry about needing a permit to conclude that the works were reclamation work.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because reclamation work in s 198A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 is a broad statutory concept that is not limited to accretion or advancement into water land and is not to be construed as the converse of dredging work. On that construction, the construction of the retaining wall involved using materials to fill in and reclaim water land, and the construction of the concrete boat ramp involved filling in water land. The evidence before the Local Court was sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the works were reclamation work, and the magistrate's findings did not depend impermissibly on Mr Parry's admissions about needing a permit.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against the convictions was granted, but the appeal was dismissed and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • ['Grants leave to appeal against the convictions imposed on the appellant, Michael Andrew Parry, by the Local Court on 4 July 2018 for two offences against s 201(1) of the Fisheries Management Act 1994.' 'Dismisses the appeal.' 'Orders the appellant to pay the costs of the appeal of the respondent, as agreed or...