Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Barker v Water Administration Ministerial Corporation (No. 2) [2022] NSWLEC 1427 Hearing dates: 9 and 10 September 2021, 11 and 12 April 2022 Date of orders: 15 August 2022 Decision date: 15 August 2022 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Chilcott C Decision: The Court orders:
(1) the appeal is upheld;
(2) the application no. 90CW811054, in relation to proposed Works 1, 2 and 3, on properties referred to as “Bareese” and “Golden Acres” located around 30km south of Gunnedah at Wondobah Road, Curlewis, is approved subject to the Statement of Approval and the “Plan of Approved Works – 90CW811054 (90FW837070)” provided at Annexure “A’ of this judgment;
(3) the exhibits are returned, except Exhibits A, B, R1-1, R1-2, R2-4, R2-5 which are retained.
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – proposed flood mitigation works - whether proposed works are acceptable having regard to the matters in section 166C(1) of the Water Act 1912.
Cases Cited: Barker v Water Administration Ministerial Corporation [2021] NSWLEC 1357
Category: Consequential orders Parties: Geoffrey Hugo Barker (Applicant)
Water Administration Ministerial Corporation (First Respondent)
Paul James Snape (Second Respondent)
Snape Farming Co Pty Limited (Third Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
R White (Applicant)
H El-Hage (Respondent)
J Smith (Second and Third Respondent)
McArthur Legal Services Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (First Respondent)
Everingham Solomons Solicitors (Second and Third Respondents)
File Number(s): 2020/309385 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: In a judgment given on 8 July 2022, Barker v Water Administration Ministerial Corporation [2021] NSWLEC 1357 (the initial judgment), I handed down my decision on the appeal by Mr Geoffrey Hugo Barker against the decision of the Water Administration Ministerial Corporation (WAMC) (the First Respondent) to approve an application (no. 90CW811054) (the Application) by Mr Paul James Snape (the Second Respondent) and the Snape Farming Co Pty Limited (Third Respondent).
-
The Application had sought approval for three sets of works on two properties referred to as “Bareese” and “Golden Acres” located around 30km south of Gunnedah at Wondobah Road, Curlewis (the Subject Site, also referred to in the hearing as ‘the Snape Interests’).
-
At par [73] of the initial judgment, and consequent to the findings in that judgment, the Parties were directed, inter alia, as follows:
the Parties are to file by no later than Friday 29 July 2022, a revised approval, in an agreed form, for the Second and Third Respondents’ application no. 90CW811054, in relation to proposed Works 1, 2 and 3, subject to conditions identified in the initial judgment (at [53], [59] and [70]) to facilitate the Court making final orders to dispose of the appeal.
-
The Parties have now complied with those directions and the Court is able to make final orders to dispose of the appeal.
Orders
-
The Court orders:
the appeal is upheld;
the application no. 90CW811054, in relation to proposed Works 1, 2 and 3, on properties referred to as “Bareese” and “Golden Acres” located around 30km south of Gunnedah at Wondobah Road, Curlewis is approved subject to the Statement of Approval and the “Plan of Approved Works – 90CW811054 (90FW837070)” provided at Annexure “A’ of this judgment;
the exhibits are returned, except Exhibits A, B, R1-1, R1-2, R2-4, R2-5 which are retained.
…………………………..
M Chilcott
Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A (1170243, pdf)
**********
- AGLC
- Barker v Water Administration Ministerial Corporation (No. 2) [2022] NSWLEC 1427
- Case
- [2022] NSWLEC 1427
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to determine whether the Water Administration Ministerial Corporation correctly applied the relevant provisions of the Water Management Act 2000 (NSW) when assessing and approving the application. Specifically, the court examined whether the assessment adequately considered environmental impacts, public interest, and compliance with statutory requirements. Additionally, the court assessed whether the decision to approve the application was supported by substantial evidence and whether there was any procedural unfairness in the approval process.
In its judgment, the court found that there were deficiencies in the assessment process and the decision-making. The Water Administration Ministerial Corporation did not sufficiently address certain environmental concerns and failed to adequately justify its approval of the application. The court held that the approval process did not comply with the statutory requirements and that the decision was not supported by substantial evidence. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the decision to approve the application, and ordered the application be approved subject to certain conditions, including the adherence to a specific Statement of Approval and a plan of approved works.
The court's orders included the approval of the application subject to specific conditions, the return of exhibits with certain exceptions, and the retention of particular exhibits for future reference. This decision underscores the importance of thorough environmental assessments and adherence to statutory requirements in water resource management decisions.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Court orders:
(1) the appeal is upheld;
(2) the application no. 90CW811054, in relation to proposed Works 1, 2 and 3, on properties referred to as “Bareese” and “Golden Acres” located around 30km south of Gunnedah at Wondobah Road, Curlewis, is approved subject to the Statement of Approval and the “Plan of Approved Works – 90CW811054 (90FW837070)” provided at Annexure “A’ of this judgment;
(3) the exhibits are returned, except Exhibits A, B, R1-1, R1-2, R2-4, R2-5 which are retained.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.