The comparison required by s 96(2)(a) of the EP&A Act involves a qualitative as well as quantitative appreciation of the developments in their proper context, including the circumstances in which the original consent was granted. A purely quantitative approach (assessing whether the modification represents 'only a fraction' of the overall development) is legally flawed. The focus may properly be on a critical element of the development that is the subject of change. The s 79C planning appraisal is relevant only to the discretionary exercise of the modification power, not to the threshold question of whether the power is available.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 87 later cases that cite this judgment.
7 of the 87 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.