Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: BG Dev 1 Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2016] NSWLEC 1085 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on Date of orders: 11 March 2016 Decision date: 11 March 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Morris C Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979Category: Principal judgment Parties: BG Dev 1 Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Waverley Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
J Reid (Applicant)
Solicitors:
Andrews & Holms (Applicant)
S Patterson, Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s): 11228 of 2015 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
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”.
-
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, 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 were made on the date recorded on those orders. A copy of those orders (including any annexures referred to in those orders) can be accessed through the link appearing below. The date of the orders appears on the first page of the orders.
…………….
Commissioner Morris
11228 of 2015 11 March 2016 (165 KB, pdf)
11228 of 2015 Morris (C) Annexure A (10.8 KB, pdf)
11228 of 2015 Morris (C) Annexure B (326 KB, pdf)
11228 of 2015 Morris_Binder1 (860 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- BG Dev 1 Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2016] NSWLEC 1085
- Case
- [2016] NSWLEC 1085
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with determining whether the council's decision was unreasonable, and whether it was consistent with the requirements of the relevant planning scheme and environmental legislation. This involved examining the evidence before the council, the reasons given for the decision, and the applicable legal standards. The court had to assess whether the council's findings were based on a proper consideration of the relevant factors, and whether the decision was within the range of outcomes that a reasonable decision-maker could have reached.
In delivering judgment, the court found that the council's decision was not unreasonable. The court accepted that the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development were significant and that the council had properly considered these factors in reaching its decision. The court also found that the decision was consistent with the relevant planning scheme and environmental legislation. The court held that the council had provided adequate reasons for its decision, and that the applicant had not established that the decision was outside the range of outcomes that a reasonable decision-maker could have reached.
The court dismissed the application for judicial review and made no orders as to costs. The council's decision to refuse consent for the development of the residential apartment complex was upheld.
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.