Where a Minister exercises the power under s 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic) to exempt an amendment from notification requirements, the court may examine briefing documents and other materials placed before the Minister (beyond published reasons) to identify the true reasons for the decision, provided those documents elucidate rather than contradict the stated reasons. A decision based on a factual premise that is wholly implausible will be Wednesbury unreasonable. Section 39(7) protects only against procedural non-compliance and does not immunise decisions tainted by jurisdictional error. A reason for exemption need not be confined to the interests of Victoria in the land the subject of the amendment, but whether reliance on an indirect benefit is legitimate will be a matter of fact and degree.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 60 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 60 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.