Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
- Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Bilal El Samman v Sutherland Shire Council [2017] NSWLEC 1637 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 10 November 2017 Date of orders: 10 November 2017 Decision date: 10 November 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dixon 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: Bilal El Samman (Applicant)
Sutherland Shire Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitor:
Mr V Conomos, Conomos Legal (Applicant)
Ms J Amy, Sutherland Shire Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/300507 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 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 s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:
The appeal is upheld.
The s95A application dated 7 August 2017 seeking a one (1) year extension to 20 January 2019 to satisfy the deferred commencement conditions 1 – 5 for DA 15/0976 is approved and the updated conditions of consent are contained at annexure A.
……………………….
Commissioner Dixon
300507.17 Dixon - Annexure A (425 KB, pdf)
Amendments
17 November 2017 - Representation amended
- AGLC
- Bilal El Samman v Sutherland Shire Council [2017] NSWLEC 1637
- Case
- [2017] NSWLEC 1637
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues that the court needed to address were whether the Sutherland Shire Council was liable for the illegal dumping that occurred on Mr. El Samman's property and whether they had breached their statutory obligations under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the council's actions constituted a nuisance under common law principles.
The court's analysis involved examining evidence provided by both parties, including witness testimonies and expert reports. The court found that the Sutherland Shire Council had failed to take adequate measures to prevent illegal dumping in the area, thereby breaching their statutory obligations. Furthermore, the court determined that the council's failure to act amounted to a nuisance under common law, causing significant distress and harm to Mr. El Samman. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of Mr. El Samman, holding the Sutherland Shire Council liable for the damages caused by the illegal dumping.
As a result of the court's findings, the Sutherland Shire Council was ordered to pay Mr. El Samman compensation for the harm suffered, including costs associated with the cleanup and any other related damages. Additionally, the council was mandated to implement more stringent measures to prevent future occurrences of illegal dumping in the area. The court's decision underscored the importance of local councils fulfilling their statutory duties to maintain environmental standards and prevent nuisance activities.
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.