The Court held that while commencement of a use consent under s 95(5) EPA Act may prevent lapsing even where pre-commencement conditions remain unsatisfied, this does not immunise ongoing operations that exceed the scope of approved plans and conditions. The case reinforces that courts will order removal of unlawful structures and cessation of unauthorised uses even where the respondent has lodged a fresh DA to regularise, and that a consent's scope is confined to its approved plans and conditions — not expanded by reference to permissible zoning uses.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.