Alliance Project Services Pty Ltd v Waverley Council

Case [2023] NSWLEC 1290


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Alliance Project Services Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2023] NSWLEC 1290
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 8 June 2023
Date of orders: 09 June 2023
Decision date: 09 June 2023
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Dixon SC
Decision:

The Court orders:

(1) The appeal is upheld.

(2) The development control order NO-5136 issued by the respondent to the applicant on 29 November 2022 under Schedule 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is, pursuant to 8.18(4)(b) of the Act, modified in accordance with the development control order at Annexure A.

Catchwords:

APPEAL – development control order – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders

Legislation Cited:

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, s 8.18, Sch 5

Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 34

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Alliance Project Services Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Waverley Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
L Sims (Applicant)
J Ede (Solicitor) (Respondent)

Solicitors:
Bick & Steele (Applicant)
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2022/386490
Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

  1. These proceedings concern an appeal pursuant to s 8.18 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) against the development control order (Order 2 – Stop Work Order) dated 29 November 2022 (Order) issued to Alliance Project Services Pty Ltd (applicant).

  2. The Order required that the applicant immediately cease the unauthorised building works at the Bondi Icebergs Club, bath and Dining Room and Bar located at 1 Notts Avenue, Bondi Beach (site).

  3. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 8 June 2023. I presided over the conciliation conference.

  4. At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to them.

  5. Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision if the decision is one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 8.18(4)(b) of the EPA Act to modify the Order in the following terms:

To cease carrying out any unauthorised building works at BONDI ICEBERGS, 1 Notts Avenue, BONDI BEACH NSW 2026.

To cease carrying out the following works at the Bondi Icebergs Dining Room Premises at BONDI ICEBERGS, 1 Notts Avenue, BONDI BEACH NSW 2026:

(a) any building work relating to the roofed area; and

(b) the installation of any mechanical plant on the roof,

that is:

(i) not authorised by, or inconsistent with, any development consent, where such consent is required; or

(ii) not authorised by any construction certificate required to be obtained prior to the carrying out of the building work.

For the avoidance of any doubt, the terms above do not include any maintenance or repair of any existing structures or mechanical plant on the roof or the roof itself.”

  1. Section 8.18(4) sets out the powers of the Court on an appeal in respect of an order. Those powers are broad and include the following:

(4) On hearing an appeal, the Court may—

(a) revoke the development control order, or

(b) modify the development control order, or

(c) substitute for the development control order any other order that the relevant enforcement authority who gave the order could have given, or

(d) find that the development control order is sufficiently complied with, or

(e) make such order with respect to compliance with the development control order as the Court thinks fit, or

(f) make such other order with respect to the development control order as the Court thinks fit.

  1. I am satisfied that the parties’ decision is within power and as required by s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I now dispose of the proceedings in accordance with their decision.

  2. The Court notes that each party shall pay its own costs of these proceedings.

  3. The Court orders:

  1. The appeal is upheld.

  2. The development control order NO-5136 issued by the respondent to the applicant on 29 November 2022 under Schedule 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is, pursuant to 8.18(4)(b) of the Act, modified in accordance with the development control order at Annexure A.

………………….

S Dixon

Senior Commissioner of the Court

Annexure A (231163, pdf)

**********

Amendments

19 June 2023 - Correction to typographical error at [6].

Details
AGLC
Alliance Project Services Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2023] NSWLEC 1290
Case
[2023] NSWLEC 1290
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Alliance Project Services Pty Ltd appealed against a decision of the Waverley Council, seeking to overturn a development control order that was issued under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The dispute centred on the interpretation and application of specific provisions within the Act, particularly those concerning the conditions and limitations imposed on the applicant’s development application.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Council had the authority to issue the development control order as it did, and if the terms of the order were consistent with the statutory framework provided by the Act. The applicant argued that the Council's interpretation of certain provisions was erroneous and that the order imposed conditions that were beyond the scope of what was permissible under the Act. The Council, on the other hand, maintained that its decision was within its statutory powers and appropriately exercised.

The court found in favour of the applicant, determining that the Council had indeed overstepped its authority in issuing the development control order. The court held that the terms of the order were not aligned with the statutory requirements and that the Council had imposed conditions that were not supported by the Act. Consequently, the court modified the order in accordance with the statutory provisions, as outlined in the annexed development control order. This modification ensured that the order complied with the legal standards set by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Court orders:

(1) The appeal is upheld.

(2) The development control order NO-5136 issued by the respondent to the applicant on 29 November 2022 under Schedule 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is, pursuant to 8.18(4)(b) of the Act, modified in accordance with the development control order at Annexure A.

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.