NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Garrett v Freeman (No. 4) [2007] NSWLEC 389
PROSECUTOR Stephen Garrett PARTIES : DEFENDANT Geoffrey Noel Freeman
FILE NUMBER(S) : 50043 of 2005 and 50044 of 2005
CORAM: Lloyd J
KEY ISSUES: Prosecution :- damage habitat of threatened species knowing that the land concerned is habitat of that kind - construction of road - offence committed by corporation - no valid assessment of the activity - person concerned in management of corporation - inconsistent, evasive and self-serving evidence - independent corroboration of evidence required - actual, imputed or constructive knowledge of the contravention
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Pt 5 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 1994 cl 82 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 cl 228 Evidence Act 1995 s 184 Freedom of Information Act 1989 Interpretation Act 1987 s 21(1), s 50(1) LEGISLATION CITED: Local Government Act 1993 s 220, ch 11, s 731 National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 s 5, s 118D, s 159A, s 169, s 175B Native Vegetation Conservation Act 1997 Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 s 193 Rural Fires Act 1997 State Environmental Planning Policy No 14 Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 Sch 2 Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2001 cl 8 of Sch 5
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