Secretary, Department of Planning and Environment v Namoi Valley Farms Pty Ltd (No 3) [2022] NSWLEC 54

Secretary, Department of Planning and Environment v Namoi Valley Farms Pty Ltd (No 3) [2022] NSWLEC 54

Section 65(2)(a) applies to Mr Harris’ representations since a duty to respond arose from statutory notices; however, representations based on maps not referenced or attached to the s 67(1) notice are not admissible due to prejudice and failure to comply with notice requirements. The notice was served late but, given the circumstances, deemed reasonable; nonetheless, the admissibility of certain representations is limited.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Hearing on Evidentiary Issue (voir Dire)
Outcome
Orders not made as sought in relation to representations referencing maps; order concerning invoice representations potentially may be made, subject to final discussion with parties. No final order yet, parties to confirm positions before completion.
Legal Topics
['hearsay Exception' 'notice Requirements' 'propriety of Admitting Representations' 'validity of Notice Under Evidence Act' 'native Vegetation Clearing']
['criminal Law' 'environmental Law' 'evidence Law'] ['hearsay Exception' 'notice Requirements' 'propriety of Admitting Representations' 'validity of Notice Under Evidence Act' 'native Vegetation Clearing']

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

Criminal / Hearing on Evidentiary Issue (voir Dire)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether representations of a deceased witness (Mr Harris) can be admitted under hearsay exception in Evidence Act s 65(2)' 'Adequacy and timeliness of notice served under Evidence Act s 67(1)' 'Admissibility of representations concerning maps and invoices not attached to notice' 'Whether admission of such representations would be unfairly prejudicial under s 135']

Ratio Decidendi

Section 65(2)(a) applies to Mr Harris’ representations since a duty to respond arose from statutory notices; however, representations based on maps not referenced or attached to the s 67(1) notice are not admissible due to prejudice and failure to comply with notice requirements. The notice was served late but, given the circumstances, deemed reasonable; nonetheless, the admissibility of certain representations is limited.

Court Disposition

Orders not made as sought in relation to representations referencing maps; order concerning invoice representations potentially may be made, subject to final discussion with parties. No final order yet, parties to confirm positions before completion.

Orders

  • []