Bathurst City Council v PWC Properties Pty Ltd

In Bathurst City Council v PWC Properties Pty Ltd, the High Court of Australia considered a dispute between PWC Properties Pty Ltd, the owner of a shopping centre, and Bathurst City Council concerning land used for a car park adjacent to the shopping centre. PWC sought to enforce an alleged obligation on the Council to maintain the land as a publicly accessible car park. The central issue was whether the land, transferred to the Council under the *Local Government Act 1919* (NSW), was subject to a trust for a public purpose, thereby restricting the Council's ability to reclassify it as operational land.

The High Court was required to determine whether the land, transferred to the Council by PWC and another vendor, was held by the Council subject to a trust for a public purpose at the commencement of the *Local Government Act 1993* (NSW) on 1 July 1993. This involved interpreting the provisions of the repealed *Local Government Act 1919* (NSW) and the transitional provisions of the later Act, specifically whether the Council's acquisition of the land created a "statutory trust" that bound its disposition. The Court also considered the nature of such a trust and the standing of parties to enforce it.

The Court reasoned that the land was held by the Council for a public purpose within the meaning of s 526 of the *Local Government Act 1919* (NSW). This section allowed councils to accept property for public purposes even if not strictly on trust in the private law sense. The Court found that the term "trust" in the transitional provisions of the *Local Government Act 1993* (NSW) was broad enough to encompass these governmental responsibilities, creating a "statutory trust" that controlled the Council's freedom to dispose of the land. The Court noted that the absence of a specific beneficial owner with standing to enforce the trust in equity did not negate the existence of this statutory constraint, as the Attorney-General retained the power to restrain actions incompatible with the Council's duties. Consequently, the Council's resolution to reclassify the land was invalid. The appeal was dismissed with costs.