NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Chisholm v Pittwater Council and Anor [2000] NSWLEC 143 APPLICANT: Samuel Chisholm
PARTIES : FIRST RESPONDENT: Pittwater Council
SECOND RESPONDENT: Willeroon Pty Ltd FILE NUMBER(S) : 40046 of 2000 CORAM: Talbot J KEY ISSUES: Development Consent :- whether decision manifestly unreasonable - whether irrelevant matters taken into account - procedural fairness - jurisdictional fact/precondition LEGISLATION CITED: Interpretation Act 1987 s 8 Pittwater Local Environmental Plan 1993 cl 32 Canyonleigh Environment Protection Society Inc v Wingecarribee Shire Council (1997) 95 LGERA 294; Clifford and Anor v Wyong Shire Council (1996) 89 LGERA 240; Corporation of the City of Enfield v Development Assessment Commission and Anor (2000) 106 LGERA 419; CASES CITED: Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Anor v Peko-Wallsend Ltd and Ors (1986) 162 CLR 24; Nashville Investments Pty Ltd v Gull Petroleum (WA) Pty Ltd and Ors (1998) 103 LGERA 1; Project Blue Sky Inc and Ors v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355; Timbarra Protection Coalition Inc v Ross Mining NL and Ors (1999) 102 LGERA 52 DATES OF HEARING: 29/05/2000, 30/05/2000, 31/05/2000, 01/06/2000, 02/06/2000 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07/11/2000
APPLICANT: Mr N A Hemmings QC (Solicitor) SOLICITORS: Allen Allen & Hemsley
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