Tepko & Ors v Water Board

The applicants, Tepko and others, sought judicial review of a decision by the Water Board to refuse their applications for water supply and sewerage services. The dispute concerned the Water Board's interpretation and application of section 104 of the *Water Board (Charges) Act 1975* (NSW) and its associated regulations, which governed the conditions under which the Board was obliged to provide such services. The matter came before the High Court of Australia, constituted by McHugh and Callinan JJ.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Water Board had acted lawfully in refusing the applicants' requests for water and sewerage services. Specifically, the court was required to determine whether the Board's interpretation of section 104 of the *Water Board (Charges) Act 1975* (NSW) and the relevant regulations, which imposed certain preconditions on the Board's obligation to supply services, was correct. This involved an examination of the statutory language and the scope of the Board's discretion.

McHugh and Callinan JJ found that the Water Board had misinterpreted section 104 of the *Water Board (Charges) Act 1975* (NSW). Their Honours held that the section imposed a positive obligation on the Board to provide services where the statutory conditions were met, and that the Board could not lawfully refuse to do so on grounds not permitted by the Act. The court emphasised that the Board's discretion was limited to the circumstances expressly contemplated by the legislation. Consequently, the court concluded that the Water Board had acted unlawfully in refusing the applications. The High Court ordered that the Water Board's decision be quashed and remitted the matter to the Water Board for reconsideration according to law.