Penrith City Council v Mathie and Anor [2000] NSWLEC 57

Penrith City Council v Mathie and Anor [2000] NSWLEC 57

The defendants committed a serious offence by flagrantly clearing a large number of trees and vegetation without development consent in circumstances requiring consent under the applicable planning instrument and after prior discussions with council officers about environmental constraints. The conduct had significant environmental impact and would prima facie warrant a penalty in the higher range, but cooperation, early guilty pleas, frank disclosure, contrition, good character, absence of prior record and acceptance of remediation justified mitigation. Each defendant was required to be punished separately, and remediation orders were appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Prosecution for Carrying Out Development Without Development Consent Contrary to Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 S 76 a / Sentencing Following Guilty Pleas
Outcome
Both defendants were convicted; each was fined $35,000, ordered to pay costs, allowed three months to pay the fine, and directed to undertake specified remediation works.
Legal Topics
['clearing and Removal of Trees Without Development Consent' 'environmental Planning Instrument Consent Requirements' 'remedial Works After Environmental Offence' 'co Offenders in the Same Interest']
['environmental Law' 'planning Law' 'sentencing'] ['clearing and Removal of Trees Without Development Consent' 'environmental Planning Instrument Consent Requirements' 'remedial Works After Environmental Offence' 'co Offenders in the Same Interest']

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

Prosecution for Carrying Out Development Without Development Consent Contrary to Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 S 76 a / Sentencing Following Guilty Pleas

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendants carried out development without development consent by clearing trees, shrubs and undergrowth on the land.' 'What penalty should be imposed for the offence having regard to the seriousness of the environmental impact and mitigating factors.' 'Whether orders should be made requiring remediation works under Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 s 126(3).' 'Whether each defendant should be punished separately notwithstanding their close relationship and common interest.']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants committed a serious offence by flagrantly clearing a large number of trees and vegetation without development consent in circumstances requiring consent under the applicable planning instrument and after prior discussions with council officers about environmental constraints. The conduct had significant environmental impact and would prima facie warrant a penalty in the higher range, but cooperation, early guilty pleas, frank disclosure, contrition, good character, absence of prior record and acceptance of remediation justified mitigation. Each defendant was required to be punished separately, and remediation orders were appropriate.

Court Disposition

Both defendants were convicted; each was fined $35,000, ordered to pay costs, allowed three months to pay the fine, and directed to undertake specified remediation works.

Orders

  • ['In matter No 50080 of 1999, Norman Munroe Mathie is convicted of the offence as charged in the summons and fined $35,000.' 'In matter No 50080 of 1999, Norman Munroe Mathie is ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings as agreed, or if there is no agreement, as determined in accordance with the Land and...