NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Huntington & Macgillivray v Hurstville City Council & Ors [2004] NSWLEC 694 APPLICANT Huntington & Macgillivray
PARTIES : FIRST RESPONDENT Hurstville City Council
SECOND RESPONDENTS David and Rosaline Kutcher FILE NUMBER(S) : 10873 of 2004 CORAM: Pain J KEY ISSUES: Question of Law :- What land does development application relate to City of Brisbane Town Planning Act 1964-1976 LEGISLATION CITED: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 s 81A, s 97 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 cl 49(1)(b) Land and Environment Court Act 1979 s 36(5), s 40 Currey v Sutherland Shire Council & Ors (1998) 100 LGRA 365; Grace Bros Pty Ltd v Willoughby Council [1981] 2 NSWLR 80 ; Hillpalm Pty Limited v Tweed Shire Council (2002) 119 LGRA 86 ; CASES CITED: Hillpalm v Tweed Shire Council [2002] NSWCA 332 ; King v Great Lakes Shire Council (1986) 58 LGRA 366 ; North Sydney Council v Ligon 302 Pty Limited (1996) 185 CLR 470; Pioneer Concrete (Qld) Pty Limited v Brisbane City Council (1980) 145 CLR 485 DATES OF HEARING: 11/11/2004 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12/16/2004
APPLICANT Mr C. Newport instructed by Mr M. Ball (agent for the Applicant)
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: FIRST RESPONDENT Mr P. Riggs (solicitor) of Deacons
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