Director-General of National Parks & Wildlife v Histollo Pty Ltd

The Director-General of National Parks and Wildlife (the Director-General) appealed to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute concerned the validity of a notice issued by the Director-General under section 118 of the *National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974* (NSW) (the Act) requiring Histollo Pty Ltd (Histollo) to remove certain improvements from land declared to be a nature reserve. Histollo had erected these improvements prior to the land being declared a nature reserve, and the Director-General contended they were unlawfully there.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the notice issued by the Director-General was valid and enforceable. Specifically, the Court had to determine whether section 118 of the Act applied retrospectively to improvements erected on land before it was declared a nature reserve, or whether it only applied to improvements erected after the declaration. This involved an interpretation of the statutory language and the intention of the legislature in enacting section 118.

The High Court, comprising Gummow and Kirby JJ, held that section 118 of the Act did not apply retrospectively. Their Honours reasoned that the plain language of the section indicated it was intended to regulate activities occurring after the declaration of a nature reserve. They emphasised that a statute should not be presumed to operate retrospectively unless clear words indicate such an intention. The Court found that the improvements were lawfully on the land at the time they were erected, and section 118 could not be used to compel their removal.

Consequently, the High Court dismissed the Director-General's appeal and affirmed the decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.