Oliver v Kempsey Shire Council [1988] NSWLEC 152

Oliver v Kempsey Shire Council [1988] NSWLEC 152

The Applicant failed to prove that any of the three parcels was rural land because the Applicant was the occupier, Mr Smith's agistment use was not the Applicant's relevant use, the Applicant's grazing of four heifers at the relevant date was not the carrying on of a grazing business, and the main use of Portion 22 was as a private residence while the main use of Portions 27 and 83 was as residential flat buildings. Each parcel was liable to water supply local rates because water from the Respondent's water pipe was supplied to the residence or flat buildings on each parcel, making s.379(1)(a) applicable notwithstanding that the parcels were more than 225 metres from the council water pipe.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 December 1988
Procedural Posture
Appeals Under S.118(7) and S.133(2) of the Local Government Act 1919 Concerning Rates for the 1988 Rate Year / Judgment
Outcome
All appeals dismissed; Applicant ordered to pay the Respondent's costs limited to the water supply local rate issue in the sum of $500; exhibits to be returned.
Legal Topics
['rural Land Rating Classification' 'water Supply Local Rates' 'onus of Proof on Ratepayer' 'meaning of Occupier and Use of Land' 'business of Grazing']
['local Government' 'rates and Land Valuation'] ['rural Land Rating Classification' 'water Supply Local Rates' 'onus of Proof on Ratepayer' 'meaning of Occupier and Use of Land' 'business of Grazing']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeals Under S.118(7) and S.133(2) of the Local Government Act 1919 Concerning Rates for the 1988 Rate Year / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether each of the ratable parcels was "rural land" within the meaning of s.118(1) of the Local Government Act 1919.' 'Whether each parcel was liable to the water supply local rate within the meaning of s.379(1) of the Local Government Act 1919.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Applicant failed to prove that any of the three parcels was rural land because the Applicant was the occupier, Mr Smith's agistment use was not the Applicant's relevant use, the Applicant's grazing of four heifers at the relevant date was not the carrying on of a grazing business, and the main use of Portion 22 was as a private residence while the main use of Portions 27 and 83 was as residential flat buildings. Each parcel was liable to water supply local rates because water from the Respondent's water pipe was supplied to the residence or flat buildings on each parcel, making s.379(1)(a) applicable notwithstanding that the parcels were more than 225 metres from the council water pipe.

Court Disposition

All appeals dismissed; Applicant ordered to pay the Respondent's costs limited to the water supply local rate issue in the sum of $500; exhibits to be returned.

Orders

  • ['Each appeal under s.118(7) of the Local Government Act 1919 be dismissed.' 'Each appeal under s.133(2) of the Local Government Act 1919 be dismissed.' "The Applicant to pay the Respondent's costs of the appeals (limited to the question of liability to the water supply local rate) in the sum of $500." 'Exhibits to...