Participation and Responsiveness in Merits Review of Polycentric Decisions: A Comparison of Development Assessment Appeals

Environmental and Planning Law Journal, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 36-52, 2010

Sydney Law School Research Paper No. 10/68

23 Pages Posted: 29 Jul 2010  

Andrew Edgar

The University of Sydney Law School

Date Written: July 28, 2010

Abstract

The question of whether tribunals operate in an inquisitorial or adversarial manner can be regarded as a starting point for evaluating their processes. It is a question that is also raised about the Land and Environment Court. In this article I argue that the merits review jurisdiction of the Land and Environment Court generally operates according to an adversarial process. This becomes clear when participation and responsiveness in the Land and Environment Court is compared with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal's Planning and Environment List which tends to operate according to inquisitorial processes. Particular risks are identified with both adversarial and inquisitorial processes in the context of merits review of development assessment decisions. I argue that the problems raised by adversarial processes are more fundamental than those raised by inquisitorial processes.

Keywords: merits review, adjudication, inquisitorial process, participation, responsiveness, environmental assessment

JEL Classification: K10, K30, K32

Suggested Citation

Edgar, Andrew, Participation and Responsiveness in Merits Review of Polycentric Decisions: A Comparison of Development Assessment Appeals (July 28, 2010). Environmental and Planning Law Journal, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 36-52, 2010; Sydney Law School Research Paper No. 10/68. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1650387

Andrew Edgar (Contact Author)

The University of Sydney Law School ( email )

New Law Building, F10
The University of Sydney
Sydney, NSW 2006
Australia

Paper statistics

Downloads
154
Rank
157,746
Abstract Views
729