16 November 2023
32 min read
#Government, #Property, Planning & Development, #Compulsory Acquisition
Published by:
Two recent cases give greater insight on how the Land and Environment Court (LEC) weighs up different factors when resolving disputes in relation to compensation amounts payable for a compulsory acquisition.
Section 55 of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW) provides that when determining the compensation amount to which a person whose interest in land is being compulsorily acquired, the following limited list of matters must be taken into consideration:
The Dibb case related to an acquisition by Transport for NSW (TfNSW) of approximately 2.7ha of land from Dibb as part of the Coffs Harbour Bypass Project.
In determining the appropriate compensation amount, the LEC considered the following factors to be significant:
The Dibb case considered how the existing physical and planning status of land could impact the assessment of the potential land use. We now compare this to another recent LEC case which provided commentary on the limited application of ‘potential use’ to an assessment of compensation.
The oOh!media case relates to land owned by Rail Corporation New South Wales (RailCorp) which was leased to Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) and subleased to oOh!media Fly Pty Limited (oOh!media). The land was located near the international and domestic terminals of Sydney's Kingsford Smith Airport. oOh!media owned and operated 18 billboards on the land which were erected in pairs back-to-back so that one of the two billboards would be presented to motorists travelling in either direction. Given the land’s location, the billboards provided highly visible outdoor advertising opportunities to display product and other messages to passing motorists.
On 18 September 2020, the oOh!media’s leasehold interest in the land was compulsorily acquired by TfNSW for the purposes of the Roads Act 1993 (NSW) in connection with the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Sydney Gateway Project. The Valuer General determined that the compensation to be paid to oOh!media was $3,797,993. oOh!media disputed the adequacy of this amount and commenced proceedings in the LEC for a judicial determination of the appropriate compensation amount.
In its judgement, the LEC considered a number of issues:
The methodology for determining the compensation amount payable as a result of a compulsory acquisition allows for the taking into account of potential future use of the acquired land. Nonetheless, the two cases demonstrate that hypothetical arguments of highest and best use must be grounded in factual evidence. That is, it is necessary to establish that a particular use was factually capable of being realised before the owner of a proprietary interest can argue compensation is payable for the loss of that use as a result of the compulsory acquisition.
If you have any questions, please get in touch with a member of our team below.
Authors: Cameron Sheather & Yunsi Feng
NSW government reviews anti-hate speech laws
The New South Wales government is reviewing whether its anti-hate speech laws need a shake up, in the face of rising racially-motivated abuse across the state and the country (14 November 2023). Listen here.
Illawarra teenagers elect ‘young mayors’ in NSW’s first underage democratic vote
Eight students in the NSW Illawarra region taking part in the Young Mayors program, the first time the program has been run in NSW. It invites 12 to 17-year-olds to nominate themselves for a position on a youth forum to share their perspective with Wollongong City Council (14 November 2023). Read more here.
80 asylum seekers in immigration detention released after High Court ruling
Eighty asylum seekers being held in immigration detention were released almost immediately following last week's High Court ruling that they were being kept unlawfully (13 November 2023). Read more here.
NSW SES gets first fleet of new rescue boats, vehicles with flood prone areas top of delivery list
The first new rescue boats for the State Emergency Service (SES) have been deployed in NSW, boosting the organisation's capacity to save people from floods. The service has bought an extra 142 boats, rafts, trucks, cars and trailers in response to recommendations from the flood inquiry last year (12 November 2023). Read more here.
Senate inquiry backs more buybacks, greater scrutiny of water-saving projects for Murray-Darling Basin bill
A Senate inquiry into the federal government's proposed changes to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan has supported the legislation but recommended amendments that boost the plan's transparency and accountability. The bill extends the deadline for state-run projects that offset environmental water recovery from the basin's irrigators by using engineering works to deliver the same environmental outcomes, and allows more time to recover the additional 450 gigalitres of environmental water (10 November 2023). Read more here.
NSW minister questions whether Kiama Municipal Council has undertaken 'fire sale' of assets
New South Wales Local Government Minister Ron Hoenig has told a budget estimates hearing he is concerned there has been a "fire sale" of assets at a South Coast council currently under an improvement order (11 November 2023). Read more here.
NSW Supreme Court Approved Registry Arrangements – Court Vacation Period
The Court’s approved vacation period is between 18 December 2023 and 25 January 2024. During this time, the Registry will operate from 10am to 4pm with reduced staff. However, the Registry will be closed on all Public Holidays and from 27 to 29 December 2023. The new court term will commence on 29 January 2024 (8 November 2023). Read more here.
New Practice Note SC CL 12
On 1 November 2023 the Chief Justice issued Practice Note SC CL 12 – Proceedings under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006, the Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017, Mental Health & Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 and Division 105A of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), with a commencement date of 3 November 2023 (2 November 2023). Read the announcement here. Read the Practice Note here.
AAT Bulletin Issue No. 22/2023
The AAT Bulletin is a fortnightly publication containing information about recently published decisions and appeals against decisions in the AAT’s General, Freedom of Information, National Disability Insurance Scheme, Security, Small Business Taxation, Taxation & Commercial and Veterans’ Appeals Divisions (6 November 2023). Read more here.
Walker v Northern Beaches Council [2023] NSWCATAD 290
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – access to government information – applicant subject to a 2015 restraint order under s 110(1) of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 that restrains him from making an access application without the approval of the Tribunal – application of the applicant to make an access application to the respondent – application refused on the grounds the application lacks merit, is misconceived and is lacking in substance.
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1013 (NSW); Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW); Government Information (Public Access) Amendment Act 2018 (NSW) (repealed).
Covid Safe Schools Inc v NSW Ministry of Health [2023] NSWCATAD 293
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Government Information (Public Access) Act – GIPA – decision that information not held – decision that information publicly available – decision to refuse to deal with application – remittance to the agency.
Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997; Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013; Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009.
Environment Protection Authority v O’Brien [2023] NSWLEC 118
ENVIRONMENTAL OFFENCES – defendant charged under s 144AA(1) of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW) – plea of guilty not entered – prosecution case agreed to be circumstantial – whether the prosecutor has established the defendant guilty of the offences beyond reasonable doubt.
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 50, 116, 165; Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW), ss 144AA, 191.
Sawari v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2023] NSWCATAD 291
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – administrative review – Government information – reasonable searches – excluded information of an agency – no consent to disclosure by the agency – conclusive presumption that there is an overriding public interest against disclosure.
Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW); Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW); Health Records and Information Privacy Act 2002 (NSW); Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW); State Records Act 1998 (NSW).
Sell & Parker Pty Ltd v Minister for Planning (No 2) [2023] NSWLEC 1661
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – State significant development – increased throughput for metal recovery and recycling facility – conditions of consent.
NSW Environment Protection Authority, Noise Policy for Industry, October 2017.
Re referral by Registrar, Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 under s 200 of the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983, concerning Mr Anderson, a Councillor; Registrar, Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 v Anderson [2023] NSWCATOD 159
ENFORCEMENT – where Registrar, Aboriginal Land Titles Act alleges that director of Aboriginal Land Council has breached provisions of the Act and Regulations made pursuant to the Act – whether Tribunal should conduct proceedings into the referral – whether respondent has breached the regulatory scheme created by the Act – what protective orders should be made against respondent where respondent found guilty of such breaches.
Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW); Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW); Local Government Act 1983 (NSW).
Muscat Developments Pty Ltd v Wollondilly Shire Council [2023] NSWLEC 121
APPEAL – question of law – Commissioner’s decision to refuse consent to remediation works – misconstruction of applicable statutory instrument – misdirection by consideration of non-applicable statute – no error of law in wrong findings of fact.
Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 (NSW); Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) ss 4.2(1), 4.15(1)(e), 4.16(1), 8.7(1); Land and Environment Court Act (NSW) ss 38(2), 39(4), 56A; Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW) ss 3, 7(1), 142A,144AAB; State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 (NSW) ss 4.6(1), 4.8, 4.10, 4.14(1); Wollondilly Development Control Plan 2016; Wollondilly Local Environmental Plan 2011 cll 2.3(2), 7.5(3).
Environment Protection Authority v Carbon MF Pty Ltd; Environment Protection Authority v Fair [2023] NSWLEC 120
SENTENCING – ss 91B, 142A(1), 169(1) and 169A of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW) – pollution of land – unlawful storage of waste tyres – failure to comply with clean-up notice – executive liability – no evidence of actual harm – potential harm foreseeable – middle range objective seriousness – contrition and remorse not demonstrated – assistance with regulatory authority – early plea of guilty – general deterrence warranted – specific deterrence not warranted – fine reduced due to capacity to pay pursuant to s 6 of Fines Act 1996 (NSW) – monetary penalty and publication order made – order for a moiety.
Crimes (Sentencing and Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW); Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW); Fines Act 1996 (NSW); Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW).
Transport for NSW v Boensch (No 2) [2023] NSWSC 1354
CIVIL PROCEDURE – notice of motion seeking summary dismissal, permanent stay, or strike out of cross-claim – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) rr 13.4, 14.28 – where the substantive proceedings principally concern the position of a common boundary between the plaintiff and the first defendant’s land – where the plaintiff submits that the cross-claim does not disclose a reasonable cause of action, seeks relief which is beyond the jurisdiction of the court and otherwise contrary to law, and is bound to fail – where the court must consider a pleading drafted by a litigant in person – HELD – leave to re-plead granted in part – balance of cross-claim summarily dismissed.
CIVIL PROCEDURE – notice of motion seeking to set aside notice to produce issued by the first defendant – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 21.10 – where the first defendant submits that the production of documents is necessary for his defence and cross-claim – HELD – some documents relevant to a fact in issue – notice to produce set aside in part.
Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth); Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW); Coastal Management Act 2016 (NSW); Limitation Act 1969 (NSW); Real Property Act 1900 (NSW); Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW); Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).
SafeWork NSW v JBS Australia Pty Ltd (No 4) [2023] NSWDC 473
CRIMINAL LAW – prosecution – work health and safety – duty of persons undertaking business – duty of employers – risk of death or serious injury – injury to.
SENTENCING – objective seriousness – deterrence – aggravating factors – mitigating factors – appropriate penalty.
SENTENCING PRINCIPLES – good prospects of rehabilitation.
WORK HEALTH AND SAFETY – worker inadequately trained.
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999; Fines Act 1996; Fines and Penalties Act 1901; Work Health and Safety Act 2011.
Dey v Industrial Relations Secretary on behalf of the Department of Communities and Justice (Community Services) (No 3) [2023] NSWIRComm 1111
EMPLOYMENT AND INDUSTRIAL LAW – termination – statutory rights – unfair dismissal – granting of relief pursuant to s 89 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW).
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW); Government Sector Employment Act 2013 (NSW); Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW), s 89; Long Service Leave Act 1995 (NSW).
Environment Protection Authority v Sydney Water Corporation [2023] NSWLEC 119
SUBPOENA – prosecutor serves subpoena to produce on Defendant – subpoena lists documents sought – Defendant files Notice of Motion seeking to have the subpoena set aside – defendant seeks to have subpoena set aside on the basis that the documents all result from voluntary environmental audits – prosecutor provided with the documents subject to a confidentiality undertaking for the purposes of this set-aside application – application made on the basis that the documents are protected documents within the scope of s 181(1) of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act) – prosecutor proposes that for documents to have been produced as a consequence of a voluntary environmental audit, the process and purpose to constitute such an audit should comply, generally, with ISO19011: 2018 – Defendant submits process for a voluntary environmental audit, understood in its proper statutory context within Part 6 of the POEO Act, did not need to mimic requirements of ISO19011 – defendant says documents were produced for the sole purpose of environmental audits – prosecutor’s approach to the concept of voluntary environmental audit too narrow and prescriptive – defendant’s approach is appropriate basis upon which to consider each of the documents set out – examination of the individual documents establishes that all but two were created for the sole purpose of voluntary environmental audits – two documents (being logs describing pipe cam footage) were not documents on their face which were produced for the sole purpose of a voluntary environmental audit – subpoena set aside with respect to the protected documents – defendant ordered to produce the two pipe cam log documents and any associated documents and video footage to the Prosecutor.
Contaminated Land Management Act 1997; Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, Chapter 6; Protection of the Environment Operations (General) Regulation 2009; Protection of the Environment Operations (General) Regulation 2021.
Riva NSW Pty Limited v The Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [2023] NSWSC 1323
CIVIL PROCEDURE – parties – vexatious litigants – leave proceedings – vexatious proceedings order made against applicant, the plaintiff in the proceedings – the applicant seeks by motion leave to file an Amended Statement of Claim – whether the Court can decline to consider the application because it is not satisfied that the application for leave is materially different from an earlier application dismissed under section 14(2) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 – whether leave to file the mended Statement of Claim should be granted pursuant to s 14(2) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act.
Civil Procedure Act 2005.
Patricia Smith v Industrial Relations Secretary in respect of Local Services [2023] NSWIRComm 1110
WORKERS COMPENSATION – protection of injured workers – reinstatement of worker – jurisdiction – whether worker dismissed as a result of workplace injury.
Workers Compensation Act 1987, ss 240, 241, 244; Government Sector Employment Act 2013, s 47(1)(d).
SafeWork NSW v Canon Roofing Solutions Pty Ltd [2023] NSWDC 467
CRIMINAL LAW – prosecution – work health and safety – duty of persons undertaking business – risk of death or serious injury.
SENTENCE – objective seriousness – mitigating factors – aggravating factors – plea of guilty – general deterrence – specific deterrence – capacity to pay appropriate penalty.
COSTS – prosecution costs.
OTHER – fall from heights – roof sheet not secured by screws – worker fell through roof – failure to undertake adequate site-specific risk assessment – failure to develop, implement and enforce adequate Safe Work Method Statement – failure to provide information, training and instruction.
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 21A, 22; Fines Act 1996 (NSW), ss 6, 122; Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW), ss 3, 14, 19, 32; Work Health and Safety Regulation 2017 (NSW), cll 78, 79.
Maules Creek Coal Pty Ltd v Environment Protection Authority [2023] NSWCCA 275
JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – Court of Criminal Appeal – apprehended bias – application for disqualification – Where trial judge made an order rejecting application to disqualify herself – whether order made was an “interlocutory order or judgment” under s 5F(3)(a) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) – where certain line of Court of Criminal Appeal authority overtaken by subsequent High Court and Court of Appeal authority.
APPEALS – Leave to appeal – aversion to granting leave where doing so may cause delay in or fragmentation of a trial.
COURTS AND JUDGES – bias – apprehended bias – application for disqualification – legal repugnance to judges receiving communications about a case outside court processes – where invitation was an innocent case of mistaken identity – necessity for apprehension of bias to be reasonable – trial judge’s decision not to disclose the meeting was erroneous but understandable – fair-minded lay observer would not reasonably conclude that the trial judge might not bring an impartial mind to the resolution of the questions the judge is required to decide – Trial judge did not err in declining to disqualify herself.
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5AE, 5F, 5F(2), 5F(3)(a); District Court Act 1973 (NSW), s 127(2)(a); Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 34; Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW), ss 64(1), 140(1); Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 101(1).
Walker v Northern Beaches Council [2023] NSWCATAD 290
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – access to government information – applicant subject to a 2015 restraint order under s 110(1) of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 that restrains him from making an access application without the approval of the Tribunal – application of the applicant to make an access application to the respondent – application refused on the grounds the application lacks merit, is misconceived and is lacking in substance.
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1013 (NSW); Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW); Government Information (Public Access) Amendment Act 2018 (NSW) (repealed).
Hinkler Ave 1 Pty Limited v Sutherland Shire Council [2023] NSWCA 264
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT – development application for mixed use development – repeal and replacement of environmental planning instrument – savings provision for development application “made, but not yet determined” by commencement date – when development application “made” – requirements to comply with prescribed form and manner – whether compliance with requirements – interpretation and application of requirements.
Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (NSW), s 7.7(2); Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 4.12, 4.15, 4.16, 8.8, 8.11, 8.14, 14, 76, 77; Pt 8, Div 8.3; Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 57; Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (NSW), cll 49, 50, 51, 54, 56, 59, 113, 246, 246A, 246B, 255, 256; Div 1 of Pt 15; Sch 1, cl 2(1)(d); State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 (NSW), Sch 7A, cl 2.
Corliss v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2023] NSWCA 263
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – jurisdictional error – application to re-open proceedings pursuant to Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 43 – where District Court dismissed application – whether jurisdictional error – whether penalty contrary to law.
SENTENCING – relevant factors on sentence – form 1 offences – jurisdictional error – Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 35A(2) – whether failure to comply with s 35A(2) invalidates sentence – no jurisdictional error.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ground of review other than procedural fairness – procedural error – right to reasons – inadequacy of reasons – whether inadequacy of reasons on part of non-superior court amounts to jurisdictional error – nature of judicial duty to give reasons – reasons adequately conveyed essential ground for decision.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – whether reviewable error of law – jurisdictional error – materiality – no practical injustice – no materiality.
Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), Pt 7, s 79(2); Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 32, 33, 35, 35A, 43, 66; Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 71; Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(c); Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), ss 69, 75.
Folkes v Secretary of the Department of Transport [2023] NSWIRComm 1109
EMPLOYMENT AND INDUSTRIAL LAW – termination – statutory rights – unfair dismissal – application brought 250 days out of time – application to extend time to lodge application – unrepresented litigant – extension opposed by Respondent – substantial delay insufficiently explained – no other factor indicating justice of case requires exercise of discretion in favour of applicant – Extension of time refused – application dismissed.
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW); Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW), ss 84, 85, Ch 7, Pt 2.
Lahoud v Willoughby City Council [2023] NSWLEC 117
JUDICIAL REVIEW – challenge to development consent for adaptive reuse of an existing commercial building, adding an additional level – conversion to mixed‑use development with shop top housing – development consent challenged on six separate grounds ‑ whether challenge to development consent commenced within statutory time limit ‑ challenge commenced within time limit – if not within in time limit, whether challenge within Hickman principles of exceptions to compliance with time limits – challenge within second of the Hickman principles.
JUDICIAL REVIEW – Ground 1 – ground alleges approved development breaches height of building development standard set by Willoughby Local Environmental Plan 2012 (the LEP) – request pursuant to cl 4.6 of the LEP to permit non‑compliance with the development standard – Planning Panel approved request to permit non‑compliance but on the basis that required modification of the development for which consent had been sought ‑ three tests in cl 4.6 of the LEP required to be applied to the proposed development for which application had been made ‑ Planning Panel did not misapply the tests in cl 4.6 of the LEP – granting of dispensation for non‑compliance of the Height of Building Development Standard valid – Ground 1 fails.
JUDICIAL REVIEW – Ground 2 – LEP requires that the western street frontage of the site be activated – majority of the western street frontage proposed to be screening of ground level car parking ‑ consideration of extent to which activated street frontage required ‑ consideration of whether requirement for activated street frontage is a development standard ‑ held requirement for activated Street frontage is a development standard amenable to a dispensation request pursuant to cl 4.6 of the LEP – no dispensation request made with the development application ‑ without a dispensation request satisfying cl 4.6 of the LEP, failure to satisfy the requirement for an activated street frontage on the western boundary of the site rendered development prohibited – Planning Panel failed to give proper consideration to requirement for activated street frontage on western boundary of the site – consideration of matters of discretion – ground 2 upheld but, as a matter of discretion, relief refused.
JUDICIAL REVIEW – Ground 3 – ground proposes shop top housing must be directly vertically above ground floor commercial premises – all dwellings above ground floor commercial premises ‑ proposed dwellings not all directly vertically above ground floor commercial premises – definition of shop top housing does not require vertical alignment above ground floor commercial premises – Ground 3 fails.
JUDICIAL REVIEW – Ground 4 – ground alleges breach of floor space ratio (FSR) permitted by development standard in the LEP – calculation of FSR by application of gross floor area (GFA) to area of the site – dispute as to areas to be included in GFA for FSR calculation – consideration of the definition of basement in the LEP – correct calculation of the FSR discloses no breach of development standard – Ground 4 fails.
JUDICIAL REVIEW – Grounds 5 and 6 – grounds alleges Planning Panel failed to consider requirements of cl 7 of State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land (the SEPP) – Applicant gives evidence of knowledge of alleged contamination of the site coming to his attention in 1995 – Applicant fails to disclose alleged contamination in submission to Council objecting to proposed development – no adequate explanation of failure to disclose alleged contamination – Applicant developer of adjacent site to the east – assuming basis for Grounds 5 and 6 made out (a matter not necessary to determine), proper exercise of discretion would require no declaration or orders appropriate arising from these grounds – no relief appropriate.
COSTS – Applicant failed on three grounds – Applicant succeeds on one ground but obtains no relief as a matter of discretion – Applicant obtains no relief on two further grounds addressed on the assumption that the grounds are made out (it not being necessary to determine if they were made out) – costs ordinarily follow the event – the event is Applicant's failure to obtain any relief – costs are discretionary – apportionment of costs – apportionment appropriate to reflect Applicant's establishment of one ground even though relief was not appropriate – Applicant to pay 80% of Respondents costs.
Environmental Planning and Assessment (Public Exhibition) Regulation 2020; Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, s 4.59; Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, cl 124; Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021; Land and Environment Court Act 1979, ss 20 and 71; State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021; State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 ‑ Remediation of Land; State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 ‑ Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development; Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, r 59.10; Willoughby Local Environmental Plan 2012.
Acts compilation
Disaster Ready Fund Act 2019 (14/11/2023) – Act No. 90 of 2019 as amended
Medibank Private Sale Act 2006 (14/11/2023) – Act No. 160 of 2006 as amended
Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (11/11/2023) – Act No. 92 of 1975 as amended
Medical Indemnity (Prudential Supervision and Product Standards) Act 2003 (11/11/2023) – Act No. 37 of 2003 as amended
Retirement Savings Accounts Act 1997 (11/11/2023) – Act No. 61 of 1997 as amended
Financial Services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Levy (Collection) Act 2023 (11/11/2023) – Act No. 45 of 2023 as amended
Financial Accountability Regime Act 2023 – Act No. 67 of 2023 as amended
National Broadband Network Companies Act 2011 (10/11/2023) – Act No. 22 of 2011 as amended
Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (10/11/2023) – Act No. 59 of 1977 as amended
Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Act 1911 (10/11/2023) – Act No. 20 of 1911 as amended
Corporations (Review Fees) Act 2003 (10/11/2023) – Act No. 23 of 2002 as amended
Financial Services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Levy Act 2023 (10/11/2023) – Act No. 44 of 2023 as amended
Corporations (Fees) Act 2001 (9/11/2023) – Act No. 52 of 2001 as amended
Medical Indemnity Act 2002 (8/11/2023) – Act No. 132 of 2002 as amended
Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (8/11/2023) – Act No. 27 of 1936 as amended
Superannuation Contributions Tax (assessment and Collection) Act 1997 (7/11/2023) – Act No. 70 of 1997 as amended
Interactive Gambling Act 2001 (7/11/2023) – Act No. 84 of 2001 as amended
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land and Sea Future Fund Act 2018 (7/11/2023) – Act No. 145 of 2018 as amended
Native Title Act 1993 (6/11/2023) – Act No. 110 of 1993 as amended
Clean Energy Regulator Act 2011 (6/11/2023) – Act No. 163 of 2011 as amended
Financial Sector (Collection of Data) Act 2001 (6/11/2023) – Act No. 104 of 2001 as amended
Payment Systems and Netting Act 1998 (6/11/2023) – Act No. 83 of 1998 as amended
Australian Defence Force Cover Act 2015 (5/11/2023) – Act No. 118 of 2015 as amended
Telstra Corporation Act 1991 (5/11/2023) – Act No. 79 of 1991 as amended
Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (5/11/2023) – Act No. 51 of 1974 as amended
Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011 (5/11/2023) – Act No. 101 of 2011 as amended
Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006 (5/11/2023) – Act No. 124 of 2006 as amended
Australian Prudential Regulation Authority Act 1998 (3/11/2023) – Act No. 50 of 1998 as amended
Personal Property Securities Act 2009 (3/11/2023) – Act No. 130 of 2009 as amended
Aged Care Act 1997 (2/11/2023) – Act No. 112 of 1997 as amended
Migration and Maritime Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Caseload) Act 2014 (2/11/2023) – Act No. 135 of 2014 as amended
Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Jobs for Families Child Care Package) Act 2017 (2/11/2023) – Act No. 22 of 2017 as amended
Trade Representative Act 1933 (2/11/2023) – Act No. 74 of 1993 as amended
Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme Act 2018 (2/11/2023)– Act No. 63 of 2018 as amended
Banking Act 1959 (2/11/2023) – Act No. 6 of 1959 as amended
Taxation Administration Act 1953 (2/11/2023) – Act No. 1 of 1953 as amended
Australian Postal Corporation Act 1989 (1/11/2023) – Act No. 64 of 1989 as amended
Life Insurance Act 1995 (1/11/2023) – Act No. 4 of 1995 as amended
Higher Education Support Act 2003 (1/11/2023) – Act No. 149 of 2003 as amended
Environmental Planning Instruments
Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Amendment (Exceptions to Development Standards) Order 2023 (EPI 522) – commenced 1 November 2023
State Environmental Planning Policy Amendment (Exception to Development Standards) 2023 (EPI 524) – commenced 1 November 2023
Disclaimer
The information in this publication is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavour to provide accurate and timely information, we do not guarantee that the information in this newsletter is accurate at the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future.
Published by:
