Halden & Anor and Western Australian Planning Commission

In the case of Halden & Anor and Western Australian Planning Commission, the applicants sought to have their proposal to subdivide their rural property into a small farm approved. The respondents, the Western Australian Planning Commission, had refused the application. The applicants sought a review of the decision by the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The applicants proposed to establish a small stud farm and supply organic produce from the land. They argued that the proposal was consistent with the rural residential use of the land. The applicants contended that their proposal would not result in the ad hoc fragmentation of productive agricultural land, as they claimed it would maintain the broadacre use of the land.

The legal issues before the court were whether the proposal was consistent with the policies of the respondents and whether the proposal was in harmony with the consistently applied policy. The court considered whether the proposal was inconsistent with the local government strategy and whether there were any analogous precedents in the locality. The court also examined whether the gravel road dividing the land was a significant man-made feature. The applicants argued that the road was not significant, but the court found that it was not relevantly significant.

The court held that the proposal was inconsistent with the policies of the respondents, which created a presumption against such subdivisions. The court also found that the proposal was not in harmony with consistently applied policy, and the applicants failed to persuade the Tribunal that it was. The court noted that the land was surrounded by much larger lots, and the proposal was inconsistent with the local government strategy. The court held that the proposal was not consistent with the policies of the respondents, and the decision under review was affirmed. The court dismissed the application for review and affirmed the decision of the respondents. The applicants were not successful in their appeal, and the decision of the respondents was upheld.