Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-31T01:35:41.343Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Salmar Holdings Pty Ltd v. Hornsby Shire Council

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2025

L. A. Warnick
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Case Notes
Information
Federal Law Review , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , March 1972 , pp. 143 - 149
Copyright
Copyright © 1972 The Australian National University

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 [1971) 1 N.S.W.R. 192. New South Wales Court of Appeal; Mason, Jacobs and Moffitt JJ.A. Hornsby Shire Council unsuccessfully appealed to the High Court. The appeal (not yet reported) dealt only with the meaning of ''trade” in s. 309 of the Local Government Act, 1919-1971 (N.S.W.); there was no discussion of the jurisdictional issue discussed in this note.

2 Amending the Equity Act, 1901-1965 by the insc>rtion of a new s. 10. Of particular relevance in the present case are sub-ss 10(1) and 10(2)(b)(vii).

3 An application for building approval under s. 312 of the Local Government Act carries a right of appeal to the Board of Appeal under s. 317U; and by s. 311X the Board may state a ca:se to the Land and Valuation Court. But if the application was made to the respondent as responsible authority under the County of Cumberland Planning Scheme Ordinance for a development approval, the right of appeal would be to the Land and Valuation Court under s. 342N.

4 [1970J 2 N.S.W.R. 289.

5 Cf., Long v. Coplnanhurst Shire Council (1969) 90 'V.N. (Pt 1) (N.S.'V.) 657; Sutherland Shire Council v. Leyendekkers (1970) 91 W.N. (N.S.W.) 250.

6 [1958] 1 Q.B. 554 (C.A.); [1960] A.C. 260 (H.L.).

7 [1964] 1 W.L.R. 219.

8 [1898] A.C. 387.

9 [1948] 1 K.B. 72l.

10 [1897] A.C. 615.

11 [1948] 1 K.B. 721, 724.

12 [1970] 2 N.S.W.R. 289, 291.

13 [1960] A.C. 260, 287.

14 Concurring judgments were delivered by Jacobs and Moffitt JJ.A.

15 (1970) 91 W.N. (N.S.W.) 250.

16 Judicial Review oj Administrative Action (2nd ed., 1968) 520.

17 (1970) 91 W.N. (N.S.W.) 250,264.

18 [1971] 1 N.S.W.R. 192, 202.

19 1d.,203.

20 The Declaratory Judgment (1962) 226.

21 [1971] 1 N.S.W.R, 192, 203-4.

22 Id., 204-5.

23 On this vexed issue, see H. Whitmore, “Judicial Review for Error of Law„(1967) 2 F.L. Rev. 159, 170-177.

24 (1959) 22 M.L.R. 664,666.

25 Presuming the as yet uncertain proclamation of this Act.