Barrak Corporation Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council [2014] NSWLEC 177

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Barrak Corporation Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council [2014] NSWLEC 177 Hearing dates: 23 October 2014 Decision date: 18 November 2014 Jurisdiction: Class 3 Before: Biscoe J Decision: Appeal dismissed with costs. Catchwords: RATES - categorisation of rateable land - appeal limited to questions of law under s 56A Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to a judge from a decision of a commissioner of the Court in a Class 3 rating matter - under s 529(2)(d) Local Government Act 1993 a council may determine a sub-category for business rateable land according to a centre of activity - owner of rateable land appealed to Court from decision of Council to refuse application under s 525(1)(b) to change the rating sub-category of the land from Business CBD to Business General to which far lower ad valorem rates applied - Court constituted by a commissioner dismissed appeal - under s 525(3) Council obliged to determine property was within the Business General sub-category nominated in application unless it has reasonable grounds for believing that the land is not within that category - under s 39(2) Land and Environment Court Act, on appeal from Council decision Court is under the same obligation - Council and Court (constituted by a commissioner) each decided had reasonable grounds for believing land not within Business General sub-category, but within Business CBD sub-category - meaning of "centre of activity" in s 529(2)(d) Local Government Act - whether Commissioner erred in law in failing to apply the correct test under s 525(3) because she asked the converse question - whether Commissioner erred in law in failing to adopt a polycentric decision-making process - whether Commissioner erred in law in concluding that a centre of activity for the Business CBD rating sub-category could include a fringe - whether Commissioner erred in law in taking into account the Business zoning - whether Commissioner erred in law in failing to take into account certain aspects of critical evidence. Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Part 3A Land and Environment Court Act ss 19(d), 39(2), 56A Local Government Act 1993 ss 514, 519-527, 529, 531 Parramatta City Centre Local Environmental Plan 2007 Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 1989 Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 28 - Parramatta Cases Cited: Barrak Corporation Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council [2014] NSWLEC 1077 Beale v Government Insurance Office of NSW (1997) 48 NSWLR 430 Bulga Milbrodale Progress Association Inc v Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and Warkworth Mining Ltd [2013] NSWLEC 48, (2013) 194 LGERA 347 Council of the City of Sydney v South Sydney City Council [2002] NSWLEC 129 Greenwood v Warringah Council [2013] NSWLEC 223, (2013) 200 LGERA 190 Marrickville Metro Shopping Centre Pty Ltd v Marrickville Council [2009] NSWLEC 109 Marrickville Metro Shopping Centre Pty Ltd v Marrickville Council [2010] NSWCA 145, (2010) 174 LGERA 67 Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act v Bathurst Local Aboriginal Land Council [2009] NSWCA 138, (2009) 166 LGERA 379 Ranglen Investments Pty Ltd v Fairfield City Council [1996] NSWLEC 192 Warkworth Mining Limited v Bulga Milbrodale Progress Association Inc [2014] NSWCA 105, (2014) 200 LGERA 375 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Barrak Corporation Pty Ltd (Applicant) Parramatta City Council (Respondent) Representation: COUNSEL: A M Pickles (Appellant) J J Hutton (Respondent) SOLICITORS: Barrak Lawyers (Applicant) Sparke Helmore (Respondent) File Number(s): 30380/14