A provision in a local environmental plan that mandates refusal of consent unless certain conditions are satisfied is inconsistent with a SEPP that permits the relevant development despite other instruments, because the two provisions cannot operate concurrently. However, a provision that merely requires the consent authority to take certain matters into consideration would not be inconsistent with such a SEPP. Compliance with a SEPP does not mandate the grant of consent; the consent authority retains its discretion under s 79C(1)(b)-(e) of the EP&A Act.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 19 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 19 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.