Australian Conservation Foundatiion Inc & Anor v The State of South Australia

The applicants, Australian Conservation Foundation Inc and the Conservation Council of the State of South Australia, sought special leave to appeal from a decision concerning a proposed tourist resort in the Flinders Ranges. The respondents were the State of South Australia and Ophix Finance Corporation. The core of the dispute involved the extent to which a private commercial entity, Ophix, could be immune from normal planning and development control requirements when undertaking a major development on Crown land within a national park, pursuant to a lease with the government.

The High Court was required to determine two principal legal issues. Firstly, it needed to consider the scope of the Crown's immunity from compliance with planning and development legislation and whether this immunity extended to a separate, non-Crown commercial entity like Ophix. Secondly, the Court had to examine the relationship between the National Parks and Wildlife Act and general planning legislation, specifically in relation to developments proposed within national parks.

The Court was presented with a legislative framework common in Australia, where national parks are governed by specific legislation and management plans, while a broader planning act applies to development across the state. The applicants argued that despite this framework, there was no direct authority on whether a commercial entity, leasing Crown land for development within a national park, could be entirely exempt from standard planning processes. The decision at first instance, by Justice Jacobs, had held that the National Parks and Wildlife Act evinced a clear intention to remove development within national parks from the ordinary planning process, citing public policy reasons related to the management of these important resources.