SCHAFFER CORPORATION LTD v EGAN AND ORS [1992] NSWCA 223

SCHAFFER CORPORATION LTD v EGAN AND ORS

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

MAHONEY JA 19 October 1992

[1992] NSWCA 223

Mahoney JA This is an application arising in relation to an appeal from a judgment given by Pearlman J on 4 September 1992.

The matter relates to a quarry operation being carried on within the municipality controlled by the Hawkesbury City Council. The company has a consent for carrying on (I shall describe them without prejudice in this way) quarrying operations. The consent will expire in August 1993. It first applied for what was, in effect, an extension of that authority in April 1990, and proceedings have been continuing in one form or another since that time. It has sought - again I put the matter in general terms and perhaps somewhat inaccurately - a fresh consent which will extend the operation of its present consent for a period of some ten years. In due course the council agreed to give such a consent, and the effect of the decision of Pearlman J was to confirm that consent so that there would be, from about the expiration of the present consent, a further consent allowing operations to be carried on for a period of some ten years. (I emphasise I have put the matter in general terms. It is sufficient that I do so. The precise details are not, I think, determinative of the present matter).

The grant of the further consent has been opposed, inter alia, by a body described in the Notice of Appeal as "East Kurrajong Residents and Owners Environmental Protection Association". I infer from what Mr Tamberlin has said that his clients are representative of various objectors who have taken objection. It may be that, on the environmental merits, the extension of the operation of the quarry should properly be opposed. That is not a matter upon which I have any evidence, nor do I express any opinion in relation to it. But after a hearing lasting a number of days, the Land and Environment Court decided to give the relevant consent. It is, as I have said, in respect of that consent that the present appeal has been brought. The appeal is limited to questions of law.