32 I accept Ms Jagot submissions, which are compelling and which I adopt. Both the textual and factual indicators identified by Ms Jagot form a comprehensive evidentiary basis supporting the finding that only the Four Fig Trees are to be considered heritage items - landscape and not the entire park. Accordingly, I also find generally that, Sch 2 is the leading provision and the Heritage Conservation Map is the subordinate provision, and thus in the event of an inconsistency, the Heritage Conservation Map must give way to Sch 2.
33 Importantly, this approach is consistent with the language and purpose of all the provisions of the LEP and the substantive operation of the LEP as a whole: Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355 at 381; Metropolitan Gas Co v Federated Gas Employees' Industrial Union (1924) 35 CLR 449 per Isaacs and Rich JJ at 455; Greek Herald Pty Ltd v Nikolopoulos (2002) 54 NSWLR 165, Mason P at 172. Furthermore, it is also supported by the statutory presumptions of expressio unius est exclusio alterius (an express reference to one matter indicates that other matters are excluded) and generalia specialibus non derogant (where there is a conflict between general and specific provisions, the specific provisions prevail).
34 Considering the whole of Sch 2, it is clear that the heritage item listings in the Schedule are intended to be limited to the description and location of items as specified. At several locations listed in the Schedule there are multiple heritage items precisely described and located. For example, at Bicentennial Park in Rozelle Bay, Sch 2 identifies an Avenue of Figs adjacent to former Tram sheds, as well as Federal Park, Jubilee Park and Pope Paul IV Reserve, as heritage items: landscape. Similarly, in relation to Glassop Street, Balmain, Sch 2 lists Elkington Park as a heritage item: landscape, though also identifies Dawn Fraser Swimming Pool as a heritage item: built. In the same way, an Avenue of Morton Bay figs and parkland at Wenworth Park in Glebe are also listed as a heritage items: landscape, although the listing specifically excludes the stadium in the park.
35 In contrast, some of the listings in Sch 2 contain only one heritage item. For example, under the listing of Birchgrove Park, Balmain, Sch 2 identifies Birchgrove Park as a heritage item: landscape. Likewise, at Donnelly Street, Balmain, White Bay Park is identified as being a heritage item: landscape, and similarly, at Ewenton Park, Balmain, Ewenton Park including two fig trees is listed as a heritage item: landscape.
36 In applying the statutory presumption of expressio unius est exclusio alterius, it is clear that the listings provided in Sch 2 are limited to the precise descriptions contained in the Schedule. For example, at Wenworth Park, the listing of an Avenue of Morton Bay figs and parkland, and express exclusion of the stadium, must be read to exclude any other matters, in particularly the inclusion of the entire Park. Thus, likewise in this case, the express listing of the Four Fig Trees must also be construed to exclude the entire of Leichhardt Park from being a heritage item: landscape. If it was the intention that the whole of the park was the heritage item, then there would have been no need to list in Sch 2 the Four Fig Trees within the park.