Canberra Greyhound Racing Club Inc v Planning and Land Authority of the Australian Capital Territory

The Canberra Greyhound Racing Club Inc (the appellant) appealed to the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory (Court of Appeal) against the primary judge's dismissal of its application for a writ of mandamus. The appellant sought to compel the Planning and Land Authority of the Australian Capital Territory (the respondent) to grant it a further Crown lease under section 254 of the *Planning and Development Act 2007* (ACT).

The Court was required to determine two principal legal issues: first, whether the primary judge had taken irrelevant considerations into account when dismissing the application; and second, whether the primary judge had erred in finding that there was no utility in granting the relief sought by the appellant.

The Court of Appeal found that the primary judge had not taken irrelevant considerations into account. Furthermore, the Court agreed with the primary judge's assessment that there was no utility in granting the relief sought, as the circumstances did not warrant the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. The Court applied established principles regarding the exercise of judicial discretion in granting writs of mandamus, emphasizing the need for a clear legal right and a corresponding duty, and that the relief sought must be practically effective.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs.