WA Council Impugning Local Laws?

[APT]

I am taking on my local council.... like its a pretty big thing thus far.. too much to go into here...

I am about to get a review of http://www.stirling.wa.gov.au/Counc.../Local Government Property Local Law 2009.pdf

The decision in BarNet Jade - Find recent Australian legal decisions, judgments, case summaries for legal professionals (Judgments And Decisions Enhanced) (swan hill v Bradbury)

These monsters only have a purported power of 'regulating' subject matter, yet have prohibited it subject to a 'licence or permit' granted by them... The above case smites those sorts of bye-laws...

It works in with a wizard of our Supreme Court ED EL MAN J , who has made an interesting decision in BarNet Jade - Find recent Australian legal decisions, judgments, case summaries for legal professionals (Judgments And Decisions Enhanced) ( Sea Shepherd ) That could also defeat local government property law 2009 as not being 'subsidiary legislation that has legislative effect' and would not then meet the required definition of a 'written law' in the Interpretation act.. Anyway... I think I will just type it up and give them a double pumper, pre-trial smiting....

 

[APT]

I just found the 'bradbury award'.. isn't that interesting.. Bradbury is a powerhouse case... and one that will smash these [Redacted by Moderator]

 

[Worldly1]

Hi there,
What is your question?

 

[APT]

Hi there,
What is your question?

Does Swan Hill v Bradbury beat Local Government Property Law 2009? Esp with regards to Camping... and s. 28 & 29 of the Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds Act 1995

 

[Ivy]

Hi APT,

In general terms, Legislation overrules any prior court case. I did a quick search for Swan Hill Shire v Bradbury and found a High Court case from 1937. Is this the case you are referring to?

Whether Swan Hill Shire can be used in your legal battle depends on firstly, which jurisdiction the case applied to and what the scope is of the legislation that you are currently trying to contest. You should also note that court cases generally have a very specific and narrow "rule" that comes from them, so just because the case appears to be similar to your situation doesn't mean that the ruling of the court will apply.

I would definitely seek legal advice on this issue. I hope the information I have given you helps. Let me know if you need me to explain anything further.

 

[APT]

For Starters, it isn't "legislation" It is questionable also if it even meets the required 'legislative effect' to even be Subsidiary legislation.... ( see s. 5 of the Interpretation act 1984 (WA).

You got the case right... It has been cited probably a hundred times... which new facts have been attributed to the 'rule' you speak about...

What the court decided in that matter, which is binding on all jurisdictions... hence the "High Court" being the Ruling Court to create such binding decisions on all states.. It has something to do with "federalism" and keeping a uniform 'set of rules' that keep States in check....

That Rule was of course... that a local government cannot prohibit "pursuant to a license or permission granted by them" any subject matter, that has clearly been given a power only to "regulate' subject matter...

Obviously I am not speaking to anyone who has actually read the case.... So there was no real point to trying to discuss a ny real valuable points that I may encounter from their side... though I am pretty well sure they will be suffering a "Bradbury beating".... If you read the 'local government property law 2000 (ultra vires)' You will see that it contains prohibition subject to 'license or consent' first being obtained from them.. which is inconsistent with the legislation giving them 'power' to 'regulate' subject matter ONLY...

Anyway.. If there are any law yers here.. read it and fight me on some points...

 

[John R]

Hi @APT ,
I'm trying to understanding the question - Is it correct to assume that you're taking a local council to court in relation to a camping permit and/or to dispute penalties or threats imposed by them in relation to camping?

 

[APT]

All of the above Sir John my Governor... I have had to fight for 4 years so far.. its a long story... but they stole my van... created my homelessness... then targeted me as a 'camper'.... I don't really meet the required statutory definitin of 'camping' anyway.... They stole everything from me...yet I am still there... It's a beach, and a Cave....

Long Story Short... their officers are not even authorised "camping inspectors" Or do they have any realother authorisations other than being 'dog acts' (see dog act 1976)...

I believe that Bradbury will pumple their local laws anyway.... as their power to prohibit pursuant to a licence or permit granted by them goes far further than the power to 'regulate' granted to them....