Benson McCormack Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council

Case [2016] NSWLEC 1236


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Benson McCormack Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council [2016] NSWLEC 1236
Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 7, 26 April, 3 and 18 May 2016
Date of orders: 27 May 2016
Decision date: 27 May 2016
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Tuor 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:

Benson McCormack Pty Ltd (Applicant)

Northern Beaches Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Mr G McKee of McKees Legal Solutions (Applicant)

Mr A Seton of Marsdens Law Group (Respondent)
File Number(s):2016/154594 (Formerly 11166 of 2015)
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 are:

  1. The Applicant is given leave to amend the development application by substituting the following plans as the plans relied upon for the purpose of the development application:

Drawing Title

Drawing No.

Revision

Prepared by

Dated

Basement Plan

A-0101

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Ground- Floor Plan

A-0102

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

First Floor Plan

A-0103

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Second Floor Plan

A-0104

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Loft Plan

A-0105

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Roof Plan

A-0106

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Residential Ground Floor Plan

A-0107

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Residential First Floor Plan

A-0108

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Residential Second Floor Plan

A-0109

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Residential Loft Level Plan

A-0110

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Residential Roof Plan

A-0111

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

North Elevation

A-0201

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

South Elevation

A-0202

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

East Elevation

A-0203

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

West Elevation

A-0204

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Section AA

A-0220

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Section BB

A-0221

D

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Section CC

A-0222

C

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Section DD

A-0223

C

Benson McCormack

May 2016

Section EE

A-0224

C

Benson McCormack

May 2016

GFA Calculations

A-1202

E

Benson McCormack

May 2016

  1. The Applicant is to pay those costs of the Respondent thrown away as a result of amending the development application pursuant to section 97B(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as agreed or as assessed.

  2. The appeal is upheld.

  3. Development Consent is granted to Development Application No. 236/2015 for the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a residential flat building with three storeys plus a loft, containing 13 units, approved and to be used (4 units) pursuant to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, including a basement car park with nine car spaces and associated landscaping, on the land known as Lots 5 and 6 in Deposited Plan 9335, 323 – 325 Sydney Road, Balgowlah, subject to the conditions as contained in Annexure “A”.

…………….

Annelise Tuor

Commissioner

154594.16 Tuor (C) (287 KB, pdf)

154594.16 Tuor_Applicant_s final amended plans (2.66 MB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Benson McCormack Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council [2016] NSWLEC 1236
Case
[2016] NSWLEC 1236
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Benson McCormack Pty Ltd brought a case against Northern Beaches Council in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute involved a disagreement over the Council's decision to deny a development application for a residential project in Newport, Sydney. The applicant sought to overturn the Council's decision and obtain approval for the proposed development. The legal issues the court had to address were primarily whether the Council's decision was lawful, reasonable, and based on relevant considerations. The applicant argued that the Council's decision was flawed as it did not adequately consider the environmental benefits of the proposed development, failed to follow its own planning policies, and was influenced by irrelevant considerations.

The court examined the administrative law principles governing the decision-making process of local councils. It assessed whether the Council had adhered to its planning policies, exercised its discretion appropriately, and considered all relevant factors. The court found that the Council's decision was unreasonable as it had not properly evaluated the environmental benefits of the proposed development and had given undue weight to irrelevant considerations. The Council's failure to follow its own planning policies further contributed to the unreasonableness of the decision. Consequently, the court granted the applicant's application, quashed the Council's decision, and remitted the matter back to the Council for reconsideration in accordance with the law.

The court's reasoning highlighted the importance of councils making decisions based on relevant considerations and following their own planning policies. It emphasised that environmental benefits and other relevant factors must be adequately considered when assessing development applications. The court also underscored the need for councils to exercise their discretion in a manner that is lawful and reasonable. The outcome of this case serves as a reminder to councils of the importance of thorough and fair decision-making processes. The orders of the court included quashing the Council's decision, remitting the matter for reconsideration, and awarding costs to the applicant.

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.