A use that is permissible with consent in a zone but arguably inconsistent with zone objectives under an objective-consistency clause (such as cl 9(3) of the BLEP 1988) is not 'prohibited' for the purposes of s 106 of the EP&A Act. Only uses expressly listed as prohibited in the zoning table attract existing use rights. Clause 9(3)-type provisions limit the consent authority's power to grant consent but do not operate as prohibitions. The grading, packing and distribution of eggs (including eggs brought from off-site) as part of a poultry farming operation is properly categorised as 'agriculture' rather than 'rural industry'.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.