Botany Municipal Council v Federal Airports Corporation [1992] HCA 52

High Court of Australia Mason C.J. Brennan, Deane, Dawson, Toohey, Gaudron and McHugh JJ. Botany Municipal Council v Federal Airports Corporation [1992] HCA 52

ORDER Answer the questions reserved for the consideration of the Full Court as follows: 1. Whether the proposed dredging activity is within the powers of the Federal Airports Corporation (the F.A.C.) under the Federal Airports Corporation Act 1986 Cth. Answer: Yes. 2. Whether the F.A.C. is a determining authority within the meaning of Pt 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 NSW. Answer: No. 3. Whether the Federal Airports Corporation Regulations (Cth) are valid exercises of the power to make regulations conferred by the Federal Airports Corporation Act. Answer: Yes. 4. Whether Pt 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and Pt VII of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 1980 (NSW) in their application to the proposed dredging are inconsistent with:—

(i) The Federal Airports Corporation Act;

(ii) The Federal Airports Corporation Regulations;

(iii) The Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974 Cth

and invalid by reason of s. 109 of the Constitution. Answer: In the light of the answer to question 2, to the effect that the F.A.C. is not a determining authority within the meaning of Pt 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, no. 5. Whether the F.A.C., in carrying out the proposed dredging activity by its contractors, is entitled to an immunity of the Crown in right of the Commonwealth which prevents Pt 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and Pt VII of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation applying in the manner claimed in the application. Answer: Unnecessary to answer. Order that the applicant pay the respondent's costs of the questions reserved.