Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Ahmad Corp Pty Ltd v Fairfield City Council [2015] NSWLEC 1450 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on - Date of orders: 20 October 2015 Decision date: 20 October 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Hussey AC Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: Demolition of existing building and constructions of 9 storey mixed residential and commercial buildings; height bulk/scale, amenity, parking, traffic, acoustic impacts. Conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ahmad Corp Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Fairfield City Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Mr M. Sonter (Applicant)
Ms J. McCullan (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Gadens Lawyers (Applicant)
Marsden Law Group (Respondent)
File Number(s): 10306 of 2015 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
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”.
-
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.
-
In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to, and have not, made any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.
-
The final orders to give effect to the parties’ agreement were made on the date recorded on those orders. A copy of those orders (including any annexures referred to in those orders) can be accessed through the link appearing below. The date of the orders appears on the first page of the orders.
…………….
Acting Commissioner Hussey
10306 of 2015 Hussey (s34) (109 KB, pdf)
10306 of 2015 Hussey (C)_Annexure A (295 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Ahmad Corp Pty Ltd v Fairfield City Council [2015] NSWLEC 1450
- Case
- [2015] NSWLEC 1450
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Fairfield City Council had acted unlawfully in rejecting the development application. Specifically, the applicant argued that the Council had failed to consider relevant planning policies and had therefore made a decision that was unreasonable. The applicant also argued that the decision-making process was flawed and that the Council had not provided adequate reasons for its decision.
In determining the matter, the Court considered the relevant statutory provisions and case law on the matter of unreasonableness in administrative law. The Court found that the Council had indeed failed to properly consider relevant planning policies, and that this failure rendered the decision unreasonable. The Court also found that the decision-making process was flawed, and that the reasons provided by the Council for its decision were inadequate. As a result, the Court found in favour of the applicant and quashed the Council's decision to deny the development application.
The Court ordered that the decision of the Fairfield City Council to deny the development application was quashed, and that the matter be remitted to the Council for reconsideration in accordance with the Court's reasons. The Court emphasised the importance of proper consideration of relevant planning policies and adequate reasons for decision-making in such cases.
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.