Tonkin v Cooma-Monaro Shire Council

The appeal concerned the Cooma-Monaro Shire Council's right to recover costs it incurred in controlling noxious weeds on land owned by the appellant, Mr Tonkin. The dispute arose from the validity of notices issued by the Council under section 18 of the *Noxious Weeds Act 1993* (NSW) and the Council's subsequent actions. The matter was heard by the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the notices issued by the Council under section 18 of the *Noxious Weeds Act* were valid and effective, and whether the Council had the power to issue multiple notices under section 20(3) of that Act. Additionally, the Court had to consider the application of section 55 of the *Local Government Act 1993* (NSW) to the Council's actions, specifically the effect of the Council's alleged non-compliance with the requirements of sections 55(1) and 55(2) on the enforceability of any contract and the availability of a claim in restitution.

The Court determined that the notices issued under section 18 of the *Noxious Weeds Act* were valid and effective. It found that the Council had the power to issue multiple notices under section 20(3) of the Act. Crucially, the Court held that the principles established in *Haynes v Sutherland Shire Council* and *Denton v Ryde Municipal Council*, which suggested that a council's failure to comply with statutory requirements could render a contract unenforceable, were not applicable in this instance. Instead, the Court applied the principles from *Pavey & Matthews Pty Ltd v Paul*, allowing for a claim in quantum meruit where services have been rendered and accepted, notwithstanding a failure to comply with statutory formalities.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.