Nettheim v Minister for Planning and Local Government

This matter concerned an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia. The applicant, David Cosman Nettheim, representing Actors Equity of Australia, sought to challenge decisions made by the Minister for Planning and Local Government, the first respondent, and Bevelon Investments Pty Ltd, the second respondent. The dispute centred on the Minister's power to revoke a permanent conservation order relating to parts of the Regent Theatre.

The applicant sought to agitate two primary legal issues. Firstly, the proper construction of section 55 of the Heritage Act, specifically whether the Minister possessed the power to revoke a permanent conservation order that he believed was no longer in force. Secondly, the applicant argued that the Minister's decision of 4 July was vitiated due to an improper purpose or the consideration of irrelevant factors, contending that the Minister's intention was to influence proceedings in the Land and Environment Court.

The applicant's argument regarding statutory construction was that section 55 of the Heritage Act contemplated the existence of an operative conservation order and a decision to revoke it. It was submitted that in this instance, the Minister purported to revoke a conservation order on 12 April 1988, but on 30 June 1988, believed this previous revocation was effective. Therefore, from the Minister's perspective, there was no operative conservation order in existence to revoke, and his subsequent revocation decision was devoid of content. The applicant further argued that the Minister's decision was made for an improper purpose, namely to impact proceedings in the Land and Environment Court, or alternatively, that he took into account irrelevant considerations, which was the same matter.