Trevor Beesley v Ballina Shire Council [2004] NSWLEC 428

Trevor Beesley v Ballina Shire Council [2004] NSWLEC 428

Condition 1.6 is related to the development application, serves a planning purpose, and is reasonable; the existing version is retained as it better facilitates mangrove regeneration and compliance with planning objectives.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 August 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Conditions of Development Consent / Final Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
['development Consent Conditions' 'right of Way' 'easement' 'boundary Adjustment' 'planning Purpose' 'reasonableness of Conditions' 'subdivision']
['planning Law'] ['development Consent Conditions' 'right of Way' 'easement' 'boundary Adjustment' 'planning Purpose' 'reasonableness of Conditions' 'subdivision']

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

Appeal Against Conditions of Development Consent / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Condition 1.6 of development consent can be lawfully imposed' "Whether Natuna Pty Ltd's objection to amended Condition 1.6 is valid"]

Ratio Decidendi

Condition 1.6 is related to the development application, serves a planning purpose, and is reasonable; the existing version is retained as it better facilitates mangrove regeneration and compliance with planning objectives.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • ['The appeal is allowed in part.' 'Conditions of Development Consent 2004-627 are amended.' 'Condition 1.2 is replaced as specified.' 'Condition 1.4(d) is replaced as specified.' 'Condition 1.6 is retained unchanged.' 'Condition 1.8 is amended as specified.' 'New condition 1.13 is added as specified.' 'Exhibit 1 is...