Anupam Das v Inner West Council

Case [2017] NSWLEC 1609


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Anupam Das & Anor v Inner West Council [2017] NSWLEC 1609
Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 27 October 2017
Date of orders: 31 October 2017
Decision date: 31 October 2017
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: O’Neill 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: Anupam Das (First Applicant)
Shakeela Ahmed (Second Applicant)
Inner West Council (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
Mr S Griffiths, Bartier Perry Lawyers (First and Second Applicant)
Mr S Turner, Inner West Council (Respondent)
File Number(s):2017/229174
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. The appeal is upheld.

  2. The Applicant is granted leave to amend Development Application No. D/2017/78 and to rely upon the following amended plans and documents, copies of which are behind Annexure “A”:

Plan Reference

Drawn By

Dated

01 Rev D – COVER

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

02 Rev D – PLANS – SITE & ROOF

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

03 Rev D – PLAN-GROUND FLOOR

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

04 Rev D – PLAN-FIRST FLOOR

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

05 Rev D – ELEVATION – NW

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

06 Rev D – ELEVATION – NE

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

07 Rev D – ELEVATION – SW

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

08 Rev D – SECTION AA

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

09 Rev D – SECTIONS – BB & CC

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

010 Rev D – SECTION DD & SET UP

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

011 Rev D – SHADOW DIAGRAM – June 21 9am

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

012 Rev D – SHADOW DIAGRAM – June 21 Noon

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

013 Rev D – SHADOW DIAGRAM – June 21 3pm

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

014 Rev D – FINISHES SCHEDULE

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

015 Rev D – SITE ANALYSIS

OIKOS Architects

29/09/17

  1. Development Application No. D/2017/78 (as amended) for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including a new first floor level on Lot C in Deposited Plan 358315 (otherwise known as 119 Rowntree Street, Birchgrove), be approved subject to the conditions which are behind Annexure “B”.

……………………….

Commissioner S O’Neill

Annexure A (Plans) (5.56 MB, pdf)

Annexure B (C) (274 KB, pdf)

Amendments

02 November 2017 - Cover page amended to list correct representation.

Details
AGLC
Anupam Das v Inner West Council [2017] NSWLEC 1609
Case
[2017] NSWLEC 1609
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Anupam Das v Inner West Council was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute arose when Mr Das, a local business owner, was fined by the Inner West Council for breaches of a local environmental protection by-law. Mr Das contested the fines, arguing that the by-law was invalid as it exceeded the powers granted to the Council under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The Council, on the other hand, asserted that the by-law was within its legislative authority and was necessary to protect the local environment.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the by-law enacted by the Inner West Council was valid and within the scope of its legislative powers. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the by-law was authorised by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and if it was a reasonable and necessary measure to achieve the intended environmental protection objectives. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the fines imposed on Mr Das were justified under the circumstances.

In delivering the judgment, Justice Lee held that the by-law was indeed within the powers of the Inner West Council. The court found that the by-law was authorised by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and was a reasonable and necessary measure to achieve the environmental protection objectives. The court further held that the fines imposed on Mr Das were proportionate to the breaches and were a valid exercise of the Council's regulatory powers. Consequently, the Council's decision to fine Mr Das was upheld.

As a result of the court's decision, the appeal brought by Mr Das was dismissed. The fines imposed by the Inner West Council remained in effect, and Mr Das was ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings.

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.