NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Seek Justice Pty Ltd v Minister for Planning [2022] NSWLEC 127 Hearing dates: 20 October 2022 Date of orders: 25 October 2022 Decision date: 25 October 2022 Jurisdiction: Class 4 Before: Pepper J Decision: See orders at [86]. Catchwords: JUDICIAL REVIEW: whether there was apprehended bias in the assessment of a development application and the granting of consent by a local planning panel – whether the local planning panel was independent from the council – whether there was apprehended bias by reason of the council's ownership of the land upon which the development was partly to occur – whether there was apprehended bias by reason of the council purportedly expressing support for the development – whether there was apprehended bias by reason of the council's asserted pecuniary interest in the outcome of the assessment of the development application – no apprehended bias found. Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 2.17, 2.18, 2.19, 2.20, 4.15, 4.8, 9.1 Local Government Act 1993, ss 8, 24, 45(2), 253, Div 2, Ch 6, Pt 2, Ch15, Pt 10 Cases Cited: Alexander v Yass Valley Council (2011) 184 LGERA 123; [2011] NSWLEC 148 Charisteas v Charisteas (2021) 393 ALR 389; [2021] HCA 29 Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337; [2000] HCA 63 Hot Holdings Pty Limited v Creasy (2002) 210 CLR 438; [2002] HCA 51 Isbester v Knox City Council (2015) 255 CLR 135; [2015] HCA 20 Johnson v Johnson (2000) 201 CLR 488; [2000] HCA 48 McGovern v Ku-ring-gai Council (2008) 72 NSWLR 504; [2008] NSWCA 209 Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Jia Legeng (2001) 205 CLR 507; [2001] HCA at 185 R v Hendon Rural District Council; Ex parte Chorley [1933] 2 KB 696 R v South Australian Planning Commission; Ex parte City of Burnside (1986) 45 SASR 487 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Seek Justice Pty Ltd (Applicant) Minister for Planning (First Respondent) Blue Mountains City Council (Second Respondent) USM Events Pty Ltd (Third Respondent) Representation: Counsel: I Jeray (Applicant) T To (Third Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate