McKeown v Minister Administering the Water Management Act 2000 [2012] NSWLEC 1354

McKeown v Minister Administering the Water Management Act 2000 [2012] NSWLEC 1354

The Court was satisfied that the applicant's raising of the access driveway was a controlled activity carried out without a controlled activity approval, that the relevant area was a natural channel conveying water and therefore a watercourse, river and water source under the Water Management Act 2000, and that...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 368 of the Water Management Act 2000 Against a Direction Issued Under S 333(2) of the Water Management Act 2000 / Decision on Appeal by Consent
Outcome
Appeal upheld by consent; amended direction made.
Legal Topics
['controlled Activity' 'direction to Protect Water Sources' 'deposition of Material on Land' 'water Source' 'waterfront Land' 'driveway Crossing' 'adverse Effect on Water Source']
['water Law' 'environmental Law' 'land and Environment Court Proceedings'] ['controlled Activity' 'direction to Protect Water Sources' 'deposition of Material on Land' 'water Source' 'waterfront Land' 'driveway Crossing' 'adverse Effect on Water Source']

Source-derived case record

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 1 Appeal Under S 368 of the Water Management Act 2000 Against a Direction Issued Under S 333(2) of the Water Management Act 2000 / Decision on Appeal by Consent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the work undertaken by the applicant in raising the access driveway was a controlled activity for the purposes of the Water Management Act 2000.' "Whether the area in which the applicant's and neighbours' driveways were located was a watercourse, river and water source under the Water Management Act 2000." 'Whether raising the access driveway without adequate cross drainage was having, had had, or was likely to have an adverse effect on a water source or waterfront land.' 'Whether the agreed amended specified measures were lawful and appropriate measures under s 333 of the Water Management Act 2000.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the applicant's raising of the access driveway was a controlled activity carried out without a controlled activity approval, that the relevant area was a natural channel conveying water and therefore a watercourse, river and water source under the Water Management Act 2000, and that raising the driveway without adequate cross drainage was likely to adversely affect that water source. The agreed construction of a causeway and associated stabilisation and scour protection works would replicate the hydraulic behaviour of the original driveway and prevent future adverse effects, so it was lawful and appropriate to allow the appeal and substitute the amended...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld by consent; amended direction made.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed.' "Pursuant to s 39(2) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979, in exercise of the functions and discretions of the Minister administering the Water Management Act 2000 and being satisfied that a controlled activity, being the deposition of material on the applicant's driveway crossing, is...