ACN 605 170 081 Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council

Case [2017] NSWLEC 1078


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: ACN 605 170 081 Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council [2017] NSWLEC 1078
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on September 9, October 18, November 29 and December 20 2016 and February 1 2017
Date of orders: 22 February 2017
Decision date: 22 February 2017
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Smithson C
Decision:

See (4) below

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: ACN 605 170 081 Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Northern Beaches Council (Respondent)
Sydney North Planning Panel (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
P Murray, Dibbs Barker (Applicant)
S Patterson, Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (First Respondent)
L McAndrew, Department of Planning and Environment (Second Respondent)
File Number(s): 2016/169513
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. COMMISSIONER: In this matter, at or after a conciliation conference, an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (the Court Act) was reached between the parties as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that was acceptable to the parties. As the presiding Commissioner, I was satisfied that the decision was one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions (this being the test applied by s 34(3) of the Court Act). As a consequence, s 34(3)(a) of the Act required me to “dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the decision”.

  2. The Court Act also required me to “set out in writing the terms of the decision” (s 34(3)(b)). The orders made to give effect to the agreement constitute that document.

  3. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to make, and have not made, any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.

  4. The final orders to give effect to the parties’ agreement under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:

  1. Leave is granted for the Applicant to rely on the plans and documents referred to in Condition 1 of Annexure “A” to this agreement.

  2. Pursuant to s97B(2) Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 NSW the Applicant is to pay the First Respondent’s costs of $6,000.00 on or before 2 March 2017, being costs thrown away as a result of the Applicant amending the Development Application.

  3. The appeal is upheld.

  4. Development Consent is granted to Development Application No. 2015/1306 for the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a mixed use development with associated car parking and landscaping on land located between 5 Mooramba Rd Dee Why NSW 2099 and 627-635 Pittwater Rd Dee Why NSW 2099 (dual street frontages) and comprising four allotments which are legally described as Lot 3A DP 402105; Lot 4 DP 659075; Lot 5 DP 655009 and Lot 100 DP 595110, subject to the conditions annexed to this Agreement at Annexure “A”.

…………….

J Smithson

Commissioner

169513.16 Annexure A (C) Slip Rule (165 KB, pdf)

169513.16 Architectural Plans (18.7 MB, pdf)

Amendments

24 February 2017 - 'Before' changed to Smithson C

07 March 2017 - Pursuant to UCPR 36.17, the slip rule, amend orders of 22 February 2017 so that attached Conditions – Annexure A - are numbered.

10 March 2017 - Correct Annexure A put in Judgment as per original slip rule

Details
AGLC
ACN 605 170 081 Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council [2017] NSWLEC 1078
Case
[2017] NSWLEC 1078
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court involved ACN 605 170 081 Pty Ltd, referred to as the appellant, and Northern Beaches Council, the respondent. The dispute centred around the enforcement of a community planning instrument, specifically the Coastal Management Plan (CMP), and the subsequent decision to revoke a development approval. The matter was heard in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issues before the court revolved around the interpretation and application of the Coastal Management Plan and the relevant statutory provisions governing development approvals and their revocation. The court was tasked with determining whether the council had the authority to revoke the development approval and if the process undertaken was lawful and in accordance with the statutory requirements. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether the appellant's rights under the development approval were prejudiced by the revocation.

In addressing these issues, the court carefully examined the language and purpose of the Coastal Management Plan, as well as the relevant statutory provisions. It was determined that the council had the authority to revoke the development approval in certain circumstances, such as when there was a failure to comply with the conditions of the approval or a change in circumstances that rendered the approval invalid. The court found that the council's decision to revoke the approval was within its lawful powers, as the appellant had failed to comply with the conditions attached to the approval. Moreover, the court held that the appellant's rights under the development approval were not prejudiced by the revocation, as the appellant had not suffered any substantial detriment as a result of the revocation.

The court concluded that the council's decision to revoke the development approval was lawful and correctly exercised. The appellant's appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the council to revoke the development approval was upheld. The court's decision serves as a reminder of the importance of strict compliance with the conditions of a development approval and the council's power to revoke such approvals when necessary.

Orders

Orders of the court

See (4) below

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.