Zhang v Woodgate and Lane Cove Council [2015] NSWLEC 10

Zhang v Woodgate and Lane Cove Council [2015] NSWLEC 10

The notice was ultra vires because it was issued to obtain information in aid of pending criminal proceedings, for a prosecutorial function not conferred under the EPA Act, and was defective because it did not adequately identify to the addressee the matter in relation to which questions were to be answered.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Notice declared invalid; costs awarded to applicant
Legal Topics
['statutory Interpretation' 'council Powers' 'environmental Planning' 'statutory Notice' 'contempt of Court']
['administrative Law' 'planning Law'] ['statutory Interpretation' 'council Powers' 'environmental Planning' 'statutory Notice' 'contempt of Court']

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

Judicial Review / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether statutory power under s 118BA of the EPA Act authorises issue of notice to enable council to exercise prosecutorial function after criminal proceedings have commenced' 'Whether issuing notice to potential witness in pending criminal proceedings involves a contempt of court' 'Whether the notice is defective for want of specificity of the matter in relation to which questions are to be answered']

Ratio Decidendi

The notice was ultra vires because it was issued to obtain information in aid of pending criminal proceedings, for a prosecutorial function not conferred under the EPA Act, and was defective because it did not adequately identify to the addressee the matter in relation to which questions were to be answered.

Court Disposition

Notice declared invalid; costs awarded to applicant

Orders

  • ['Declare that the notice issued by Mr Woodgate on 29 August 2014 to Mr Ferguson to attend a place to answer questions is invalid.' "Order that the respondents pay the applicant's costs of the proceedings."]