The Court refused joinder of a neighbouring objector as second respondent in a Class 1 development appeal, holding that the geotechnical and hydrogeological issues the objector sought to raise were already sufficiently addressed by Council's Statement of Facts and Contentions, particularly contention 6(b) concerning hydrogeological impacts. The Court confirmed that the possibility of the applicant and council reaching agreement at a s 34 conciliation conference is not on its own a proper ground for joinder, and that the objector's ability to participate as an objector at hearing provided adequate opportunity to ventilate concerns.
The full text is available to signed-in members.