Record numbers of planning disputes are being fought in court as developers increasingly challenge council decisions and communities find themselves caught in the middle of battles over what gets built in their suburbs.
A plan to demolish an affordable inner-Sydney boarding house for luxury homes, a coastal housing estates opposed by hundreds of residents, and a 20-storey Blacktown office tower by developer Bathla were among hundreds of developments approved by the NSW Land and Environment Court in 2025 after initially being refused by councils.
A newly released review by the court revealed 1108 development-related appeals were finalised last year – an average of more than three cases per day and the highest annual total since published records began in 2006.
An analysis by this masthead of 743 publicly available judgments found 706 appeals resulted in approval, including through court-directed conciliation, while just 37 were refused – a success rate of 95 per cent.
The cases highlight mounting tensions between the state’s push to increase housing supply, councils seeking to enforce planning controls and residents concerned about the future of their neighbourhoods.
Among the most contentious approvals was the demolition of a 32-room Paddington boarding house, overturning a City of Sydney council refusal over the loss of affordable accommodation and the displacement of tenants.
Other projects included an $80 million over-55s estate with 146 homes on coastal land in Yamba, a fast-food precinct featuring McDonald’s, KFC and Guzman y Gomez outlets at Kariong that generated hundreds objections from residents, and a solar farm with more than 9000 panels in Deniliquin.
The court’s review found 54 per cent of development appeals arose after councils failed to determine applications within statutory deadlines of 40 days for standard applications and 60 days for larger proposals. Under NSW planning law, applicants can appeal when applications are deemed refused because deadlines have expired.
The figures have intensified scrutiny of councils after the NSW government introduced reforms to allow more housing in established suburbs and warned local authorities they risked losing planning powers if assessment times failed to improve.
Latest Department of Planning data shows 67 per cent of development applications are being assessed within its timing expectations, but several councils are recording rates below 30 per cent, including Burwood, Strathfield, Willoughby, Lane Cove and Hunters Hill.
Statewide, a total of 1635 development applications were refused by councils in 2025-26, with Canterbury-Bankstown topping the list at 161, followed by Georges River (87), Woollahra (86), Sutherland (82) and Ku-ring-gai (66).
Planning Minister Paul Scully said delays were alarming during a housing supply crisis.
“Projects which fit within planning controls should not end up in the Land and Environment Court, wasting ratepayers’ money and adding thousands to the cost of new homes,” he said.
“It’s disappointing that some councils are continuing to stand in the way of much-needed housing supply.”
Woollahra Council defended the highest number of appeals in NSW in 2025 with 59, followed by Northern Beaches (41), Central Coast (40) Georges River (37) and Liverpool and Inner West, each with 36.
Affluent eastern suburbs and lower north shore councils also dominated appeals relative to population. Woollahra recorded the highest rate, followed by Hunters Hill, Mosman, Waverley, Willoughby and North Sydney. Fairfield recorded six appeals, Camden six and Campbelltown eight.
University of Sydney urban planning professor Nicole Gurran said the concentration of appeals in wealthier areas could reflect the financial incentives associated with developing valuable land.
“The more valuable the site, the more likely a developer is to push the envelope and propose something that might not otherwise be permissible under council planning controls,” Gurran said.
“Developers can then effectively engage in ‘decision shopping’ by appealing refusals in court in the hope of securing a more favourable outcome.”
Woollahra mayor Sarah Dixson rejected suggestions the appeal figures showed her council was disproportionately refusing applications, saying some proposals went well beyond existing planning rules.
“Every application is assessed on its merits, but there are a lot of applications which go far beyond the scope of council controls that are not appropriate,” she said.
Dixson said recently introduced NSW government planning reforms that allowed greater building heights and density had increased the complexity of applications, making statutory deadlines harder to meet.
She said the council preferred to resolve disputes through conciliation where possible but acknowledged concerns about the lack of public transparency of the confidentiality of those negotiations.
Tom Forrest, chief executive of property industry group Urban Taskforce, said lengthy legal battles could add tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees and holding costs, undermining a project’s financial viability and slowing the supply of new homes.
But community groups say the growing reliance on court appeals risks sidelining local knowledge about infrastructure and the effects of development in their suburbs.
Dennis Mentzines of the Drummoyne Responsible Development Group cited a nine-storey waterfront proposal approved on appeal after Canada Bay Council rejected it. The development was lodged under state’s new reforms for low and mid-rise housing permitting larger buildings in areas previously restricted to lower-density housing.
“Local councils have a very good understanding of their own unique infrastructure constraints – schools, roads and hospitals – and the impacts on the local area,” Mentzines said.
“The courts are now looking at one-size-fits-all statewide planning changes across suburbs that are all completely different to one another.”
Local Government NSW has called for a review of deemed-refusal rules, arguing they can push disputes into court before councils have sufficient time to resolve technical issues or complete complex assessments.
Across all its jurisdictions, the court finalised 1671 cases in 2025, up 6 per cent on the previous year. Other cases settled by the court included a rising number of tree disputes, which jumped 14 per cent to 154 over the 12-month period.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.