CITATION: Nature Conservation Council of New South Wales Inc v The Minister Administering the Water Management Act 2000 (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 44
JUDGMENT DATE:
7 March 2005JUDGMENT OF: Spigelman CJ; Beazley JA; Tobias JA
DECISION: Order that the appeal be dismissed and that there be no order as to costs
PARTIES: Nature Conservation Council of NSW Inc
The Minister Administering the Water Management Act 2000FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40112/04
SOLICITORS: Environmental Defenders Office (Appellant)
Crown Solicitors Office (Respondent)
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Land & Environment Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 40573/03
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Talbot J
CA 40112/04
Monday 7 March 2005SPIGELMAN CJ
BEAZLEY JA
TOBIAS JA
1 THE COURT: The Court delivered judgment in this matter on 9 February 2005. The Court ordered that the Appellant pay the Respondent’s costs.
2 The Appellant has approached the Court by Notice of Motion seeking a variation of this order pursuant to the slip rule on the basis that the Respondent did not seek costs and accepted that there should be no order in the Respondent’s favour if the appeal failed. The Respondent accepts that that was so.
3 The Court accepts that the order made on 9 February did arise from an oversight of the submissions in this regard and accepts that the case for variation of the order has been made out. Accordingly, the order set out in par [96] of the judgment of the Court and made in the Court on 9 February 2005 should be amended to read:
- “Order that the appeal be dismissed and that there be no order as to costs.”
- AGLC
- Nature Conservation Council of New South Wales Inc v The Minister Administering the Water Management Act 2000 (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 44
- Case
- [2005] NSWCA 44
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the respondent had properly considered and applied the provisions of the *Water Management Act 2000* (NSW) and the *Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979* (NSW) in granting the development approval. Specifically, the court was required to determine if the Minister had taken into account all relevant considerations and disregarded irrelevant ones, and whether the decision-making process was otherwise lawful.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The reasoning of the court, as indicated by the orders made, suggests that the applicant failed to demonstrate that the Minister's decision was legally flawed. The court found no grounds to interfere with the Minister's exercise of discretion or the application of the relevant statutory provisions. The decision to dismiss the appeal without an order as to costs indicates that the court did not find exceptional circumstances to depart from the usual rule that costs follow the event, or that the appeal was without merit.
Orders
Orders of the court
Order that the appeal be dismissed and that there be no order as to costs
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.