Baraz Construction Pty Ltd v Strathfield Council

[2016] NSWLEC 1287

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Baraz Construction Pty Ltd v Strathfield Council [2016] NSWLEC 1287
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 22 April 2016
Date of orders:	12 July 2016
Decision date:	12 July 2016
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Fakes C
Decision:	See (4) below
Catchwords:	MODIFICATION APPLICATION; Residential Flat Building; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited:	Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Baraz Construction Pty Ltd (Applicant) Strathfield Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Applicant: Mr D Tyrell (Solicitor) Respondent: Mr T O’Connor (Solicitor)   Solicitors: McKees Legal Solutions (Applicant) Houston Dearn O’Connor (Respondent)
File Number(s):	152457 of 2016
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, 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 applicant is granted leave to rely upon the amended plans referred to in Condition 1 of Annexure “A”.

2. The Appeal is upheld.

3. The s 96 modification application in respect of Development Consent No. 2014/112/01 (“Development Consent”) seeking the modification of the approval for the construction of a residential flat building over basement car parking is approved with the conditions of the Development Consent being modified as set out in Annexure “A” to this agreement. The consolidated conditions of the Development Consent are as set out in Annexure “B”.

________________________

Judy Fakes

Commissioner of the Court

152457.16 Annexure A (128 KB, pdf)

152457.16 Annexure B (93.9 KB, pdf)

Decision last updated: 12 July 2016