El Cheikh v Hurstville City Council & (2) Ors [2001] NSWLEC 175

El Cheikh v Hurstville City Council & (2) Ors [2001] NSWLEC 175

None of the claimed statutory defaults under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and its regulations affecting public participation, provision of particulars, or reporting to the Minister, either individually or cumulatively, rendered Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994 (Amendment No. 23) invalid. The public notification, read contextually, fulfilled both the form and purpose of s 66, and other procedural requirements were adequately satisfied.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 August 2001
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['validity of Local Environmental Plan' 'public Notification Requirements' 'compliance With Statutory Procedures' 'director General Delegation' 'judicial Review Grounds']

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 / Final Judgment at First Instance

  1. 1 ['Whether the making of Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994 (Amendment No. 23) was invalid for failure to comply with statutory requirements concerning public notification, information to the Director-General, and content of reports under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulation 1994.']

Ratio Decidendi

None of the claimed statutory defaults under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and its regulations affecting public participation, provision of particulars, or reporting to the Minister, either individually or cumulatively, rendered Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994 (Amendment No. 23) invalid. The public notification, read contextually, fulfilled both the form and purpose of s 66, and other procedural requirements were adequately satisfied.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.' 'The question of costs is reserved.' 'The exhibits may be returned.']