The appellants were convicted of offences under the Planning Act 2016 (the Act).
On appeal, the appellant company argued that the company was charged under the wrong section of the Act. The second appellant, who was the sole director of the company, argued that he did not have knowledge of the breach of the development approval because the property was managed by an agent.
The Court dismissed the appeal. Richards DCJ held that the charges could have been made under either section of the Act. The Court further held that, even though the property was managed by agent, the appellant director of the company was aware of the breach of the development approval and failed to take steps to remedy it.
The judgment is published here.