Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Asfour v Yass Valley Council [2024] NSWLEC 1019 Hearing dates: Conciliation Conference on 23 November 2023 Date of orders: 24 January 2024 Decision date: 24 January 2024 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Harding AC Decision: In Proceedings 2023/188944, the Court orders that:
(a) The appeal is upheld.
(b) Pursuant to s 8.18(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act1979, Development Order C47H22/23 dated 18 May 2023 is modified in accordance with the Modified Order filed at the Land and Environment Court on 21 December 2023.
In proceedings 2023/188957, the Court orders:
(a) The appeal is upheld.
(b) Pursuant to s 8.18(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Development Order C47122/23 dated 18 May 2023 is modified in accordance with the Modified Order filed at the Land and Environment Court on 21 December 2023.
Catchwords: Development Control Orders – agreement reached – orders modified.
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, ss 8.18, 9.34, Part 1 Sch 5
Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 34
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Khaled Jamal Asfour (Applicant)
Yass Valley Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
T Zreika (Applicant)
A Menyhart (Respondent)
Stirling Legal (Applicant)
Bradley Allen Love Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2023/188944
2023/188957Publication restriction: Nil
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: These are two appeals as follows.
2023/188944 - An appeal against the Development Control order issued by the respondent, Yass Valley Council, pursuant to s 9.34(1) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (the EPA Act) dated 18 May 2023. The order is a ‘Stop Use Order & Restore Works Order’ pursuant to Item 1 and Item 10 of the table in Part 1 of Schedule 5 of the EPA Act in respect to works at lot 7 DP 285245, known as 5 Ambleside Avenue, Murrumbateman. In summary, this order was to:
immediately stop use of the Building as a dwelling;
restore the Building to the condition it was before unlawful building works and other works occurred by no later than 4pm, 17 August 2023 ;
lawfully dispose of waste generated from restoration works and implement incident prevention and environmental safety controls whilst restoration work is taking place; and
arrange a further Council inspection of the Building.
2023/188957 - An appeal against the Development Control order issued by the respondent, Yass Valley Council, pursuant to s 9.34(1) of the EPA Act dated 18 May 2023. The order is a ‘Stop Use Order & Demolish Works Order’ pursuant to Items 1 and 3 of the table in Part 1 of Schedule 5 of the EPA Act in respect to works at lot 7 DP 285245, known as 5 Ambleside Avenue, Murrumbateman. In summary, this order was to:
immediately stop use of the Building;
demolish the Building by no later than 4pm, 17 August 2023
implement incident prevention and environmental safety controls whilst demolition works were being carried out, lawfully dispose of waste generated from the demolition works and return the area where the Building was to a safe and healthy condition by 18 August 2023; and
arrange a further Council inspection of the premises.
-
The orders arise from the position that the use of the “shed” on the site does not extend to the use of the building as a dwelling, a use for which the respondent says the necessary development consent has not been obtained. A second set of orders pertain to the erection and use of a workshop on the property, for which the respondent also says, that the necessary development consent has not been obtained.
-
It is not disputed between the parties that the relevant works require development consent. The parties agree that grounds for the issue of the orders, which listed in Part 1 to Schedule 5 of the EPA Act and which are the basis for issuing Development Control Orders, are applicable in this matter.
-
The Court arranged a conciliation conference between the parties under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (the LEC Act). I presided over the conciliation conference which was held on 23 November 2023.
-
The parties advised the Court that an agreement under s 34(3) of the LEC Act was capable of being reached. The decision agreed upon by the parties is that the appeal be upheld and that the two Development Control Orders be modified, pursuant to s 8.18(4) of the EPA Act.
-
As the presiding Commissioner, I am satisfied that the decision to make the requested orders, to modify the Development Control Orders, is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. Accordingly, I am required, under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties decision. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, the parties have not raised, and I am not aware, of any jurisdictional impediment to the making of these orders.
-
The final orders to give effect to the parties’ various agreements under s 34(3) of the LEC Act are:
-
The Court orders that:
In respect to proceedings 2023/188944 – the Court orders that:
The appeal is upheld.
Pursuant to s 8.18(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act1979, Development Order C47H22/23 dated 18 May 2023 is modified in accordance with the Modified Order filed at the Land and Environment Court on 21 December 2023.
In respect to proceedings 2023/188957 – the Court orders that:
The appeal is upheld.
Pursuant to s 8.18(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Development Order C47122/23 dated 18 May 2023 is modified in accordance with the Modified Order filed at the Land and Environment Court on 21 December 2023.
Stuart Harding
Acting Commissioner of the Court
**********
- AGLC
- Asfour v Yass Valley Council [2024] NSWLEC 1019
- Case
- [2024] NSWLEC 1019
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The key legal issues the Court was required to address included whether the Council had the statutory authority to impose certain conditions on the development order, and whether those conditions were reasonable and necessary to address environmental and planning concerns. The Court also needed to consider whether the process followed by the Council in issuing the development order was compliant with the relevant legislative provisions. Additionally, the Court assessed whether the appellant's procedural rights were respected throughout the decision-making process.
The Court found that the Council had exceeded its statutory authority in imposing certain conditions that were not directly related to the development's environmental impact. The conditions were deemed to be beyond the scope of what was permissible under the Act, leading to an invalid development order. The Court also determined that the Council's process for issuing the development order was flawed, as it did not adequately consider all relevant factors and failed to provide sufficient reasons for the conditions imposed. As a result, the Court ruled that the appeal was well-founded, and the development order was modified to exclude the invalid conditions.
In light of the findings, the Court upheld the appellant's appeal, modifying the development orders in accordance with the Modified Order filed at the Land and Environment Court on 21 December 2023. The Court's decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory authority and procedural fairness when issuing development orders.
Orders
Orders of the court
In Proceedings 2023/188944, the Court orders that:
(a) The appeal is upheld.
(b) Pursuant to s 8.18(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Development Order C47H22/23 dated 18 May 2023 is modified in accordance with the Modified Order filed at the Land and Environment Court on 21 December 2023.
In proceedings 2023/188957, the Court orders:
(a) The appeal is upheld.
(b) Pursuant to s 8.18(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Development Order C47122/23 dated 18 May 2023 is modified in accordance with the Modified Order filed at the Land and Environment Court on 21 December 2023.
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.