In polycentric decision-making processes involving interconnected and competing interests of numerous persons in the context of the public interest, the content of the duty of procedural fairness does not require individual hearings on subsidiary elements of the decision, particularly where the affected party's complaint concerns exclusion from a favourable category that emerged from consideration of submissions already made. The question whether the power to amend a water management plan under s 45(1) of the Water Management Act 2000 can ever attract a duty of procedural fairness was expressly left open.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 13 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 13 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.