Repeat GIPA Applications – Irvine v Temora Shire Council
This decision shows when a council can refuse to deal with a repeat GIPA application where the same information has already been considered.
Read MoreAuthor: Alyce Kliese
Alyce is a civil engineer and a practicing lawyer, who has a desire to share her insights on the legal and practical realities of the development industry.
When a GIPA Request Is Too Burdensome – Efremov v NSW Health Administration Corporation
This case explains how agencies should assess whether dealing with a GIPA request would require an unreasonable and substantial diversion of resources.
Read MoreLegal Professional Privilege Under GIPA: Curtis v Penrith City Council
Legal professional privilege remains a powerful reason to refuse access under the GIPA Act, including where the advice comes from in-house council lawyers.
Read MoreReasonable Searches and Privilege – McNeill v Clarence Valley Council
Two common GIPA issues are considered – what counts as reasonable searches for documents, and how legal professional privilege applies.
Read MoreNSW Planning Act Reform – January 2026
Access a concise summary of the planning reforms introduced in January 2026.
Read MoreWhen GIPA Disclosure Means Disclosure to the World – Adams v Commissioner of Police
When information is released, it is treated as disclosure to the public at large, not just to the person who made the application.
Read MoreMeaning of Boundary Adjustment – Vollmer v Port Stephens Council
Can you consolidate lots, redraw them, and still call it a “boundary adjustment”? The Land and Environment Court says no.
Read MoreDeferred Commencement Conditions – Painters Lane Developments Pty Ltd v Central Coast Council
A dispute over whether a development consent had lapsed turned on the precise wording of a deferred commencement condition.
Read MoreAssessing a DA Under the Wrong Planning Controls – Ross v Randwick City Council
A modification approval unravelled after the Court found the council assessed it under the wrong DCP.
Read MoreFirst Interpretation of the Recognise Country Guidelines – 170 Willmington Road Pty Ltd v Liverpool City Council
In the first decision interpreting the Recognise Country Guidelines, the Court confirmed that Aboriginal cultural heritage considerations must meaningfully inform a development’s design at DA stage.
Read More
