Rao v Canterbury City Council

[2000] NSWCCA 471

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Offences under environmental legislation
4. › Whether summons disclosed offence known to law
5. › Whether summons identified essential factual ingredients of offence
6. › Whether reference to s76(2) necessary
7. › Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 76(2), 125(1)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Summary offences
3. › Sufficiency of charges
4. › Essential factual ingredients distinguished from particulars and legal source of offence
5. › Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 43
1. Criminal Law
2. › Evidence
3. › Credibility findings
4. › Appeal by way of rehearing
5. › Whether trial judge's acceptance of accomplice evidence open on the evidence
6. › Standard of appellate review of credibility findings
1. Criminal Law
2. › Summary offences
3. › Trial by judge alone
4. › Whether Fleming v R requirements for jury warnings apply to summary proceedings
5. › Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 32-33
6. › Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 165

Quick Take

A summons charging an offence under s125 of the EP&A Act 1979 (NSW) need not refer to s76(2) where it identifies the development consent, specifies the conditions breached, and states the acts of non-compliance. Conditions of a development consent may themselves constitute directions and prohibitions for the purposes of s125(1). The requirements of Fleming v R regarding accomplice warnings and other jury directions in judge-alone trials on indictment do not apply to summary proceedings in the Land and Environment Court.