Territory Stories

Debates Day 1 - Tuesday 30 November 1993

Details:

Title

Debates Day 1 - Tuesday 30 November 1993

Other title

Parliamentary Record 23

Collection

Debates for 6th Assembly 1990 - 1994; ParliamentNT; Parliamentary Record; 6th Assembly 1990 - 1994

Date

1993-11-30

Notes

Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Language

English

Subject

Debates

Publisher name

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Place of publication

Darwin

File type

application/pdf

Use

Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)

Copyright owner

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

License

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/279510

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/418780

Page content

DEBATES - Tuesday 30 November 1993 New clause 99: Mr HATTON: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 143-86. This amendment substitutes a new clause 99 which has been extensively redrafted to cover several matters not covered adequately in the bill as it stood. A right of appeal is to be provided in respect of deemed conditions relating to contributions for infrastructure or car parking. It was the intention to provide for a right of appeal but legal advice suggests that the appeal provisions in the bill as it stands do not cover the deemed conditions. This clarifies the appeal rights in respect of applications under proposed sections 57 and 58 as per the initial determination of a development application and of a situation where a consent authority determines an application after an appeal is lodged against its initial failure to determine the matter. New subclause (1) sets out the right of an applicant to appeal and also specifies the time within which appeals in respect of various matters may be lodged. The subclause has been expanded to include reference to applications under proposed sections 57 or 58 as matters that are appealable under this part. Proposed section 57 provides that the holder of a development permit may apply to the consent authority for an extension of the period of the permit and proposed section 58 provides for an application to vary a condition of permit. In both cases, determinations by the consent authority should be subject to the same right of appeal, if any, as applies to the original determinations. In practice, an appeal in respect of proposed section 58 at least would be unlikely since only minor variations are permitted under this section. New subclause (2) has been restated to cover matters included elsewhere in the new clause. New subclause (3) extends the right of appeal in respect of determinations under proposed sections 57 or 58, as with the previous amendment, to the situation where the consent authority has not determined an application within 12 weeks, similar to the provisions in new subclause (2) that relate to a development application. New subclause (4) provides a right of appeal to the holder of a development permit in respect of a deemed condition under proposed section 29(1) - that is, the payment of contributions for infrastructure or car parking. The only ground provided for such an appeal under new subclause (4) is that, in the particular circumstances of the case, the service authority should have refunded or remitted the contribution in whole or in part, as it is empowered to do under proposed section 32(d). New subclause (5), which is a redraft of the existing subclause (3). simplifies the previous wording and includes an addition which is consequential on the inclusion of new subclause (4). The addition provides that a service authority is not prevented by the lodgement of an appeal in respect of a contribution from determining to refund or remit the contribution at any time before the appeal is heard. The redrafted subclause clarifies also that, where the consent authority determines an application or varies its determination, or similarly where the service authority determines to refund or remit a contribution after an appeal is lodged, the appeal lapses but, if he or she wishes, the applicant may lodge a fresh appeal against the determination just made. Fees paid in respect of the lapsed appeal are refundable. Mrs PADGHAM-PURICH: Mr Chairman, proposed new subclause (l)(c) reads: 'may, where the failure of a consent authority to determine an application 10 682


Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are advised that this website may contain the names, voices and images of people who have died, as well as other culturally sensitive content. Please be aware that some collection items may use outdated phrases or words which reflect the attitude of the creator at the time, and are now considered offensive.

We use temporary cookies on this site to provide functionality.
By continuing to use this site without changing your settings, you consent to our use of cookies.