Randall Pty Ltd v Willoughby City Council

(2005) 144 LGERA 119; [2005] NSWCA 205

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Planning and Environment Law
2. › Development consent
3. › Modification of consent
4. › Application of s 96 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW)
5. › Matters for consideration under s 79C(1)(b)
6. › Economic impacts in the locality
7. › Whether economic impact on individual businesses within a development constitutes relevant economic impact
8. › Whether redistribution of business within locality is a 'zero sum game'
9. › Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 79C(1)(b), 96
1. Administrative Law
2. › Mandatory and discretionary considerations
3. › Whether addressing non-mandatory consideration demonstrates error of law
4. › Whether treating discretionary factor as mandatory consideration constitutes invalidating error
1. Administrative Law
2. › Statutory construction
3. › Jurisdictional fact versus opinion as to state of facts
4. › Whether 'economic impact' and 'locality' are matters for consent authority's opinion subject to outer limits of connotation

Quick Take

The concept of 'economic impact in the locality' under s 79C(1)(b) of the EP&A Act is not limited to impacts on the amenity of the locality and should not be glossed with a requirement that the impact be 'an environmental or planning matter'. The consent authority has broad latitude to identify what constitutes a relevant economic impact and what constitutes the appropriate locality, subject to outer limits of connotation. A single building or development can constitute a relevant 'locality'. The restrictive approach in Fabcot and Cartier Holdings may be too narrow.