NSW register name: Maitland City Council Briefing (PDF) View on the map

Development applications in Maitland City Council

We have no rezoning amendments on record for this council yet, but we track its development applications. The figures below are counted directly from the development application register over the last 12 months.

Development applications · last 12 months

Applications lodged in this council in the trailing 12 months, by current status. Counted directly from the development application register.

Total lodged
1043
last 12 months
Lodged
0
Under assessment
170
Determined
818
Withdrawn
55

See all development applications in Maitland City Council

Decision speed

How quickly this council determines a development application, measured from lodgement to determination across every decided application that carries both dates.

Median time to decision
42 days
half are decided faster than this
Average
62 days
a few slow cases pull this up
Based on
2,223
determined applications

Planning disputes

19 on record

Planning and environment court and tribunal matters naming Maitland City Council, newest first. Each links to the full public judgment.

MatterCourtDecided
Farley Environment Care Inc. v HL Fry Properties Pty Ltd [2021] NSWLEC 77 PROCEDURE – leave sought to rely on expert funeral industry evidence in judicial review proceedings – evidence of funeral industry consultant to inform characterisation of development consent for crematorium and cemetery reasonably necessary PROCEDURE – leave sought to rely on ecological evidence in judicial review proceedings – whether biodiversity development assessment report required in relation to development consent for crematorium and cemetery a question of jurisdictional fact – ecologicaNSWLEC20 July 2021
Downes v Maitland City Council [2020] NSWSC 1555 CIVIL PROCEDURE — Summary disposal — Dismissal of proceedings — Claim by plaintiffs alleging negligence and nuisance — Where defendant relies on Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) s 733 as a complete defence — Whether triable issue as to whether defendant acted in good faithNSWSC4 Nov 2020
Passmore v Maitland City Council [2017] NSWCA 253 TORTS — Negligence — Proof of negligence — primary judge not satisfied the appellant was injured as a result of the condition of the tennis court — no error in primary judge’s accepting evidence of respondent’s witnesses — no issue of principle raised CIVIL PROCEDURE — Hearings — Adjournment — no error in primary judge’s refusal to adjourn hearing CIVIL PROCEDURE — Separate determination of questions — no error in primary judge’s ordering that question of liability be determined separately and iNSWCA13 Oct 2017
Vincent Land Pty Ltd v Maitland City Council [2017] NSWSC 719 PROCEDURE – courts – transfer of proceedings between courts – proceedings commenced in Supreme Court seeking relief not available in the Land and Environment Court – related proceedings already commenced in the Land and Environment Court – both proceedings dealing with different aspects of the same subject matter – Supreme Court proceedings transferredNSWSC6 June 2017
Vincent Land Pty Ltd v Hyder Consulting Pty Limited [2012] NSWLEC 261 PROCEDURE - application for strike out or summary dismissal of proceedings by applicant for modification of development consent acting as an agent for the owner of land - no cause of action disclosed in points of claim - applicant for modification application a proper party to proceedings - no order for strike out or dismissal madeNSWLEC29 Nov 2012
Vincent Land Pty Ltd v Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] NSWLEC 272 JUDICIAL REVIEW - application by consent for making of declaration of invalidity of modification to a landfill facility consent - necessity for declaration establishedNSWLEC29 Nov 2012
Vincent Land Pty Ltd v Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd [2012] NSWLEC 105 JUDICIAL REVIEW: application seeking an order that a council furnish the applicant with a written statement setting out its reasons for its approval of a modification application - council the proponent of the modification application - applicable legal principles - importance of reasons - application madeNSWLEC8 May 2012
Maitland City Council v Khalil [2012] NSWLEC 58 CIVIL ENFORCEMENT - failure to repair or make structural alterations to a building in accordance with statutory orders - failure to remove waste from a building in accordance with council order - orders to remedy breaches of statute - applicant council sought court order for it to carry out work required by statutory orders - respondent building owner sought for court to extend time in statutory orders to carry out works himself - variation of statutory orders not within Court's Class 4 jurisdicNSWLEC29 Feb 2012
Atkins v Maitland City Council [2010] NSWLEC 36 QUESTION OF LAW :- determination of separate question pursuant to Part 28 rule 2 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 - whether development permissible – interpretation of planning instrument - subdivision control – minimum allotment size – concessional allotment – context – development permissibleNSWLEC18 Mar 2010
Maitland City Council v Link Building Services Pty Limited [2008] NSWLEC 71 Prosecution :- carrying out development without first obtaining development consent - plea of guilty - penalty - relevant objective considerations - gaining commercial advantage - no environmental harm - no direct expression of contrition and remorse - mitigating factorsNSWLEC31 Jan 2008
Whitlock v Maitland City Council [2007] NSWLEC 625 Prosecution :- appeal against conviction - sales of seafood from mobile food van - existing use rights - shops - convenience stores - leave to rely on fresh evidence - appeal dismissedNSWLEC13 Sept 2007
Maitland City Council v Anambah Homes Pty Limited [2005] NSWCA 455 ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING - Development consent - Subject to condition requiring dedication of land free of cost - Whether condition protected from challenge to validity - Whether condition severable - Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 s 94, s 101 - ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Privative provisions - ‘Manifest’ jurisdictional error - Threefold Hickman principle - Third limb - Whether decision reasonably capable of reference to power - Whether excess of jurisdiction appeared on face of consenNSWCA16 Dec 2005
T & E BOURBOUS v MAITLAND CITY COUNCIL [2005] NSWLEC 483 Compensation - Compulsory Acquisition of Land :- Rear of existing shop premises - whether acquired land flood affected - whether acuired land had any development potential - Special ValueNSWLEC5 Sept 2005
Maitland City Council v Barry Murdoch & Anor [2005] NSWSC 762 Rates paid pursuant to declaration by council as to category - concession that land had been incorrectly categorised - moneys had and received - jurisdiction of Local Court - moneys paid under mistake - areas of challenge available where decision is made in Small Claims Division.NSWSC2 Aug 2005
Anambah Homes Pty Limited v Maitland City Council [No 2] [2004] NSWLEC 719 Judicial Review :- whether invalid consent condition requiring the dedication of land is severable - validity of consent conditions requiring the carrying out of works on cyclewayNSWLEC21 Dec 2004
Anambah Homes Pty Limited v Maitland City Council [2004] NSWLEC 615 Judicial Review :- validity of consent conditions - application of s 101 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 - Hickman principlesNSWLEC13 Dec 2004
JOHNSON v JOHNSON [1991] NSWCA 159 NSWCA10 Sept 1991
J ROBINS (CHIPPENDALE) PTY LTD v SAKIC [1989] NSWCA 108 NSWCA21 Sept 1989
MAITLAND CITY COUNCIL ABATTOIR DEPARTMENT v SUTCLIFFE [1989] NSWCA 134 NSWCA16 May 1989

Discovery signals matched on council name. We link to the public judgment; we do not reproduce its text.

How these numbers are computed

  • Development applications are counted directly from the development application register over the trailing 12 months, grouped by their current canonical status. The full list is on the applications page.

Computed from 1,043 records from nsw-caselaw / nsw-online-da / NSW Planning Portal (PPR) / VIC Amendments Online, fetched 13 June 2026; data © state planning departments, licensed CC BY 4.0.

Zoning and planning data © State of New South Wales (Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure) and © State of Victoria (Department of Transport and Planning), licensed under CC BY 4.0. Basemap © OpenFreeMap © OpenMapTiles Data © OpenStreetMap contributors. Zoning renders for WA © Western Australian Land Information Authority and TAS © State of Tasmania.

Data sources update daily. State-by-state coverage · How to read the map · How we compare