❓ Question regarding legal advice on the Leighton Marshalling yards development and the government's obligations to Leighton Shores. The government confirms the legal advice suggested they weren't legally bound, but this was based on contested factual assumptions.
AnsweredQoN 367Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(b) did The West Australian article reflect the legal advice received, in that, the Government was not bound legally to continue with Leighton Shores, as the developer of the Leighton Marshalling yards; (c) if so, were there any qualifications to that statement in the legal advice; and (d) if not, what was the legal advice received?
(c) if so, were there any qualifications to that statement in the legal advice; and (d) if not, what was the legal advice received?
(d) if not, what was the legal advice received?
(b) Yes. However the advice was based on certain factual assumptions concerning the conduct of the parties, which assumptions are contested by the consortium awarded preferred proponent status. (c) See above. (d) Not applicable.
(c) See above. (d) Not applicable.
(d) Not applicable.
(c) if so, were there any qualifications to that statement in the legal advice; and (d) if not, what was the legal advice received?
(d) if not, what was the legal advice received?
(b) Yes. However the advice was based on certain factual assumptions concerning the conduct of the parties, which assumptions are contested by the consortium awarded preferred proponent status. (c) See above. (d) Not applicable.
(c) See above. (d) Not applicable.
(d) Not applicable.
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
13 September 2001
Responded by
Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
Response time
93 days
(a) March 2001.
(b) Yes. However the advice was based on certain factual assumptions concerning the conduct of the parties, which assumptions are contested by the consortium awarded preferred proponent status.
(c) See above.
(d) Not applicable.
(b) Yes. However the advice was based on certain factual assumptions concerning the conduct of the parties, which assumptions are contested by the consortium awarded preferred proponent status.
(c) See above.
(d) Not applicable.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.