Where the existence and extent of conflict with a planning scheme are the critical issues at first instance and the existence of conflict is not obvious, a Planning and Environment Court judge must provide adequate reasons identifying and construing the relevant scheme provisions and explaining the reasoning process; bare assertions of conflict without such analysis constitute an error of law. The same obligation applies to reasons for rejecting grounds advanced to justify approval notwithstanding conflict.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.