
Environmental & Planning judgments from Australian courts and tribunals, with a plain-English summary, the legal holding and frequently asked questions.
The Federal Court ruled that a delegate's decision not to classify a proposed tourism operation as a controlled action under environmental laws was incorrect because it failed to consider if the project was part of a larger plan. This means the decision must be reviewed again, potentially affecting future similar cases.
The Supreme Court of New South Wales ruled that the claimant was entitled to payment for variations and the removal of contaminated fill from the site, as the work was properly instructed and executed according to the contract.
In this case, the NSW Land and Environment Court resolved a dispute between neighbours over a Swamp Mahogany tree. The claimant argued that the tree had caused damage and was likely to cause more damage in the future. The Court agreed and ordered the respondents to hire an arborist to prune the tree to remove deadwood and reduce the crown above the claimant's property.
A court decision modified a development control order issued by a council. The order required the demolition of unauthorised carport and shed structures. However, the Court allowed modifications to bring these structures into compliance with environmental planning standards.
The Land and Environment Court granted conditional development consent for a residential flat building project after a conciliation conference with the Ku-ring-gai Council. The decision was made based on the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and related policies.
The Land and Environment Court granted permission to amend a development application for a semi-detached house. The amendment allows for changes that increase the setback of the northern wall of the upper level of the proposed addition, ensuring compatibility with the surrounding buildings and reducing visual bulk.
A self-represented litigant successfully appealed against the refusal of their development application for a two-storey boarding house in Lakemba. The Land and the address granted approval for the project, subject to certain conditions, despite objections raised by the Council regarding character compatibility and amenity impacts.
The Land and Environment Court found a defendant guilty of directing the unlawful cutting down of 74 trees protected by a tree preservation order. The court ruled that the defendant was responsible for the actions of contractors who carried out the tree cutting, despite the defendant's claims of innocence.
The Land and the address of New South Wales upheld an appeal for a strata subdivision within the a person Hospital Conservation Area. The court approved the development application after finding that it complied with relevant planning controls and was consistent with objectives set out in the Masterplan and Development Control Plan.