Link v NSW Minister for Primary Industries & Ors

The applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Link, sought judicial review of decisions made by the NSW Minister for Primary Industries and the NSW Department of Primary Industries concerning the management of their property, "Glenbrook," which was subject to a conservation agreement under the *National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974* (NSW). The dispute centred on the respondents' refusal to grant consent for certain proposed developments on the property, which the applicants contended were permissible under the terms of the conservation agreement and relevant legislation. The matter came before the High Court of Australia.

The High Court was required to determine whether the Minister's decisions to refuse consent for the proposed developments were affected by jurisdictional error. Specifically, the court considered whether the Minister had misinterpreted the scope of the conservation agreement and the relevant provisions of the *National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974* (NSW) and the *Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979* (NSW) when assessing the applicants' development proposals. The central question was whether the Minister had failed to take into account relevant considerations or taken into account irrelevant considerations in reaching their decisions.

The High Court found that the Minister had erred in law by misinterpreting the conservation agreement and the statutory framework governing its operation. The court held that the Minister had failed to properly consider the nature and extent of the rights and obligations created by the conservation agreement, particularly in relation to the applicants' ability to undertake certain activities on their land. The reasoning focused on the proper construction of the agreement and the statutory provisions, emphasizing that the Minister's discretion was not unfettered and must be exercised in accordance with the law and the terms of the agreement. The court concluded that the decisions were vitiated by jurisdictional error.

The High Court ordered that the decisions of the Minister be quashed and remitted the matter to the Minister for redetermination according to law.