NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Sumar Produce Pty Ltd v Griffith City Council [2000] NSWLEC 72 APPLICANT: Sumar Produce Pty Ltd PARTIES : RESPONDENT: Griffith City Council FILE NUMBER(S) : 10705 of 1999; 11121 of 1999 CORAM: Talbot J KEY ISSUES: Appeal from Administrative Decision :- noise control notice - appeal - setting of appropriate levels for frost control fan on agricultural land LEGISLATION CITED: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 s 39 Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 s 264, s 266 CASES CITED: DATES OF HEARING: 24/03/2000, 27/03/2000, 28/03/2000, 31/03/2000 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/11/2000
APPLICANT: Mrs J C Kelly (Barrister) SOLICITORS: Commins Hendriks LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT: Mr A M Hawkes (Solicitor) SOLICITORS: Pike Pike & Fenwick
JUDGMENT:
IN THE LAND AND Matter No. 10705 of 1999 ENVIRONMENT COURT And: 11121 of 1999 OF NEW SOUTH WALES Coram: Talbot J Decision Date: 11 April, 2000
Sumar Produce Pty Ltd Applicant v Griffith City Council Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Background
1. These proceedings have been commenced by way of an appeal against a noise control notice given pursuant to s 264 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (the PEO Act).
2. The original notice was issued by council on 1 September 1999 and varied by a second notice on 29 November 1999.
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