Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Attar Constructions Pty Ltd v Campbelltown City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1637 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 1 and 22 November 2018 Date of orders: 07 December 2018 Decision date: 07 December 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Walsh C Decision: See [7] below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Campbelltown Local Environmental Plan 2015
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979Category: Principal judgment Parties: Attar Constructions Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Campbelltown City Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
D Baird, Baird Lawyers (Applicant)
A Seton, Marsdens Law Group (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2018/265241 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal under s 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 against the deemed refusal by Campbelltown City Council of development application DA 1914/2018/DA-RS for consolidation of two lots into one, the construction of four attached two storey dwellings on the consolidated lot, and subdivision of the lot into four strata allotments. The site is at 14-16 Poulton Terrace Campbelltown, also described as Lots 4407 and 4408 DP 1217018 (site).
-
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.
-
My power to dispose of these proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision under s 34(3) is dependent on the satisfaction of any relevant jurisdictional pre-requisites. I have considered the advice of the parties in regard to jurisdictional pre-requisites. Having regard to this advice I am satisfied, in regard to cl 7.10 of Campbelltown Local Environmental Plan 2015, that the required essential services are available or that adequate arrangements have been made to make them available when required.
-
As the presiding Commissioner, and again in accordance with the advice provided, I am satisfied that the decision of the parties 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 requires 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 make, 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 under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:
The applicant is granted leave to rely on amended plans (detailed in Condition 1 to Annexure “A”).
The Applicant is to pay those costs of the Respondent thrown away as a result of amending the development application pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the agreed amount of $2,000 within 28 days of the date of these orders.
The appeal is upheld.
Development Application No. 1914/2018/DA-RS (as amended) for the consolidation of lots 4407 and 4408 in DP 1217018 into one lot, the construction of three (3) attached two storey dwellings on the consolidated lot, and subdivision of the lot into three (3) strata allotments, on the land at 14 - 16 Poulton Terrace, Campbelltown (Lots 4407 and 4408 in DP 1217018) is approved subject to the conditions of consent contained in Annexure "A" hereto.
……………………….
Peter Walsh
Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A (260 KB, pdf)
Plans (3.23 MB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Attar Constructions Pty Ltd v Campbelltown City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1637
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 1637
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues that the court had to address were whether the Council's decision to reject the development application was lawful, rational, and in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions and planning policies. The court was tasked with determining whether the Council had acted within its powers, followed proper procedures, and whether the decision was supported by appropriate reasons. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the Council's decision was unreasonable or discriminatory.
The court found that the Council's decision to reject the application was lawful and rational. It was determined that the Council had exercised its powers correctly and followed the requisite procedures. The reasons provided by the Council were found to be adequate and justified the decision. The court also held that there was no evidence of unreasonableness or discrimination in the Council's decision-making process. Consequently, the court dismissed Attar Constructions' appeal, upholding the Council's decision.
Orders
Orders of the court
See [7] 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.