An appeal from a decision or order of the Environment, Resources and Development Court lies to a single judge of the Supreme Court in the following cases [Environment, Resources and Development Court Act 1993 (SA) s 30]:

In all other cases the appeal is to the Court of Appeal [s 30(1)(e)].

Appeals can be made on matters of law as of right, while the Court's permission to appeal is required on matters of fact [s 30(2)].

Because any dissatisfied party can appeal against an ERD Court decision, it often arises that a party that is successful in the ERD Court has to defend its win in a second court case before the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal. This can have important consequences for third party appellants, who are typically local residents who have appealed against an inappropriate development in their neighbourhood. The main consequence is that the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal are not "user-friendly" jurisdictions that encourage parties to represent themselves. It is also riskier in relation to awards of legal costs against unsuccessful parties. This is discussed in the following topic Costs.

Commercial competitive interest

Section 208 of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 (SA) outlines when a commercial competitive interest in any relevant proceedings must be disclosed (which includes proceedings for judicial review). A person who fails to make a disclosure as required by s 208 commits an offence, with a maximum penalty of $20,000.

Section 209 of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 (SA) creates a right of action in certain circumstances to recover loss (including economic loss) where the sole or predominant purpose of pursuing proceedings was to delay or prevent the development in order to obtain commercial benefit.