Residents Against Intermodal Development Moorebank Incorporated v Minister for Planning [2017] NSWLEC 115

Residents Against Intermodal Development Moorebank Incorporated v Minister for Planning [2017] NSWLEC 115

RAID Moorebank was an unincorporated body which made submissions objecting to the development application for the intermodal terminal under s 79(5) of the EPA Act, and upon incorporation as RAIDM Inc, the right to appeal under s 98(1) of the EPA Act passed to RAIDM Inc pursuant to Sch 2 cl 2(1)(b) of the Associations Incorporation Act. Qube did not establish that RAIDM Inc lacked standing.

Parties
Applicant: Residents Against Intermodal Development Moorebank Incorporated; First Respondent: Minister for Planning; Second Respondent: Qube Holdings Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Challenging Standing in Class 1 Proceedings / Interlocutory; Determination of Notice of Motion to Summarily Dismiss Appeal for Lack of Standing
Outcome
Challenge to standing dismissed; costs awarded to applicant
Legal Topics
Standing to Appeal, Incorporated Associations, Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, Associations Incorporation Act
Administrative Law Environmental Law Planning Law Standing to Appeal Incorporated Associations Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Associations Incorporation Act

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Residents Against Intermodal Development Moorebank Incorporated

Applicant

Minister for Planning

First Respondent

Qube Holdings Limited

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion Challenging Standing in Class 1 Proceedings / Interlocutory; Determination of Notice of Motion to Summarily Dismiss Appeal for Lack of Standing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an incorporated association (RAIDM Inc) has standing to appeal as an 'objector' under s 98(1) of the EPA Act
  2. 2 Whether the rights of an unincorporated body (RAID Moorebank) pass to a subsequently incorporated association under Sch 2 cl 2(1)(b) of the Associations Incorporation Act
  3. 3 Whether RAID Moorebank was a 'person' who made a submission under s 79(5) of the EPA Act

Ratio Decidendi

RAID Moorebank was an unincorporated body which made submissions objecting to the development application for the intermodal terminal under s 79(5) of the EPA Act, and upon incorporation as RAIDM Inc, the right to appeal under s 98(1) of the EPA Act passed to RAIDM Inc pursuant to Sch 2 cl 2(1)(b) of the Associations Incorporation Act. Qube did not establish that RAIDM Inc lacked standing.

Court Disposition

Challenge to standing dismissed; costs awarded to applicant

Orders

  • The second respondent's notice of motion filed on 7 June 2017 is dismissed.
  • The second respondent is to pay the applicant's costs of the motion.