Michael Brown Planning Strategies v Wingecarribee Shire Council (No 2)

The matter before the Supreme Court of New South Wales was a dispute between Michael Brown Planning Strategies and Wingecarribee Shire Council. Michael Brown Planning Strategies sought judicial review of a decision by the Council to refuse planning approval for a development on a piece of land in Robertson. The Council's refusal was based on the development not complying with the Robertson Town Centre Structure Plan. Michael Brown Planning Strategies argued that the refusal was unreasonable and sought a declaration that the refusal was invalid, and an order for the Council to approve the development. The Court was required to determine whether the Council's decision to refuse planning approval was lawful and whether the refusal was unreasonable.

The Court considered whether the refusal was in accordance with the law, whether the decision-maker had considered all relevant matters, and whether the refusal was unreasonable. The Court found that the Council's decision to refuse planning approval was in accordance with the law and that the decision-maker had considered all relevant matters. However, the Court found that the refusal was unreasonable as the Council had failed to consider the benefits of the development, including the potential economic benefits to the local community. The Court found that the refusal was not a reasonable exercise of the Council's discretion and that the refusal was therefore invalid.

The Court made a declaration that the Council's refusal to approve the development was invalid and quashed the decision. The Court did not order the Council to approve the development but rather remitted the matter back to the Council for reconsideration in light of the Court's findings. The Court's decision highlights the importance of decision-makers considering all relevant matters and the potential benefits of a proposed development when making a decision on a planning application.