Re MacTiernan; Ex parte Coogee Coastal Action Coalition Inc

In the case of Re MacTiernan; Ex parte Coogee Coastal Action Coalition Inc, the dispute involved the Coogee Coastal Action Coalition Inc, who sought prerogative relief against a decision made by MacTiernan. The case was heard in the New South Wales Court of Appeal. The Coalition argued that the amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme, which was intended to facilitate a grant or transfer of land under the Land Administration Act, derogated from the common law public rights of fishing and navigation. They sought to prevent the issuance of title to the land, claiming that the amendment was biased and beyond the scope of section 33 of the Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act.

The court was required to decide whether the Coalition's application to prohibit or prevent the issuance of title was premature and whether certiorari was available. The court also had to determine whether the amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme derogated from the common law public rights of fishing and navigation, and whether the intended grant or transfer of land under the Land Administration Act amounted to a bias that would invalidate the decision. The court had to examine the scope of section 33 of the Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act to determine whether the amendment fell within its bounds.

The court found that the application to prohibit or prevent the issuance of title was premature, as the land had not yet been granted or transferred. The court also found that certiorari was not available as the decision-maker had not exceeded their jurisdiction. The court held that the amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme did not derogate from the common law public rights of fishing and navigation, and that there was no evidence of bias in the decision-making process. The court found that the amendment fell within the scope of section 33 of the Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act.

The order nisi was discharged, and declaratory relief was refused. The Coalition's application for prerogative relief was dismissed. The court held that the decision-maker had not acted beyond their jurisdiction, and that the amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme did not derogate from the common law public rights of fishing and navigation. The court found that the application was premature, and that there was no evidence of bias in the decision-making process.