Anthony Gleeson v Northern Beaches Council

Case [2017] NSWLEC 1215


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Anthony Gleeson v Northern Beaches Council [2017] NSWLEC 1215
Hearing dates: 28 April 2017
Date of orders: 28 April 2017
Decision date: 28 April 2017
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Morris 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: Anthony Gleeson (Applicant)
Ana Gleeson (Applicant)
Northern Beaches Council (Respondent)
Representation: A Sattler (Applicant)
J Munn (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2016/302237
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 to the Applicant to rely on the following amended plans

Drawing Number

Revision

Title

Author

Date

DA00 *

C

Site Analysis Plan

Haviland Architects

3 April 2017

DA01

C

Roof Plan

3 April 2017

DA02

C

Basement Floor Plan

3 April 2017

DA03

C

Roof plan

3 April 2017

DA04

C

First Floor Residential

3 April 2017

DA05

C

Second Floor Residential

3 April 2017

DA06

C

South & East Elevations

3 April 2017

DA07

C

North & West Elevations

3 April 2017

DA08

C

Sections AA & BB

3 April 2017

SD01

C

Winter Shadows 9am & 12pm

3 April 2017

SDO2

C

Winter Shadow 3pm

3 April 2017


L-01

B

Landscape Plan Podium Ground Floor

Space Landscape Designs

30 March 2017

L-02

B

Landscape Plan First Floor Residential

  1. The appeal is upheld.

  2. Development application No. N0267/16 for Demolition of all existing structures and the construction of a shoptop housing development, comprising 3 commercial units, 20 residential units and off-street parking at 2-8 Rickard Road, North Narrabeen, is approved in accordance with the conditions set out in Annexure A.

…………….

Sue Morris

Commissioner of the Court

302237.16 Annexure A (C) (491 KB, pdf)

302237.16 Plans (11.7 MB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Anthony Gleeson v Northern Beaches Council [2017] NSWLEC 1215
Case
[2017] NSWLEC 1215
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Anthony Gleeson versus Northern Beaches Council was heard in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales. The dispute arose from the respondent council's decision to deny a development application made by the applicant for a commercial project on his property. The applicant sought judicial review of the council's decision, arguing that the decision was unreasonable and not in accordance with the law.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the council's decision to deny the development application was lawful, rational, and based on proper consideration of the relevant statutory provisions and factors. The applicant contended that the council had failed to adequately consider the merits of the development proposal and had instead relied on extraneous and irrelevant considerations. The respondent council argued that its decision was based on a proper and rational assessment of the proposal in accordance with the Development Act and the relevant planning policies and guidelines.

The court found that the council's decision was indeed based on irrelevant considerations and was therefore unlawful. The court held that the council had failed to properly consider the merits of the development proposal and had instead relied on factors that were not relevant to the assessment of the proposal. The court further found that the council's decision was not rationally related to the statutory objectives and policies that were relevant to the assessment of the proposal. The court concluded that the council's decision was therefore unreasonable and ought to be set aside.

The court ordered that the council's decision to deny the development application be set aside and that the matter be remitted to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the law. The court further ordered that the applicant be entitled to his costs of the application.

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.