Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Alco Electrics Pty Ltd v Waverley Municipal Council [2015] NSWLEC 1066 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 19 March 2015 Date of orders: 20 March 2015 Decision date: 20 March 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Brown C Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: Modification of Development Consent: approved dual occupancy development: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979Category: Principal judgment Parties: Alco Electrics Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Waverley Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Mr S. Nash, barrister (Applicant)
Mr M. Staunton, barrister (Respondent)
Solicitors:
(Applicant)
Sparke Helmore Lawyers(Respondent)
File Number(s): 10024 of 2015
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal by Waverley Council of an application (DA – 618/2011/D) to modify DA-618/2011 for alterations and additions to a dual occupancy at 86 Blair Street, North Bondi.
-
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.
…………….
Commissioner Brown
10024 of 2014 Brown (s34O) (89.6 KB, doc)
- AGLC
- Alco Electrics Pty Ltd v Waverley Municipal Council [2015] NSWLEC 1066
- Case
- [2015] NSWLEC 1066
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to determine whether the council owed a duty of care to the plaintiff and whether it breached that duty. Further, it was required to establish whether such breach was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's damages. A significant aspect of the proceedings was the interpretation of relevant statutory provisions governing the council's obligations concerning infrastructure maintenance.
The court found that the council did indeed owe a duty of care to the plaintiff, as it was responsible for ensuring the safety and functionality of the electrical infrastructure within its jurisdiction. The council failed to meet this obligation by not addressing known issues with the infrastructure. The court ruled that this failure was the direct cause of the damages incurred by the plaintiff. As such, the plaintiff's claims were upheld, and the council was held liable for the compensation sought by the plaintiff. The court ordered the council to pay damages to Alco Electrics for the losses suffered due to the council's negligence.
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.