Blacktown City Council v Claus Reinhardt

[2008] NSWLEC 130

Land and Environment Court

of New South Wales

CITATION:

Blacktown City Council v Claus Reinhardt [2008] NSWLEC 130

PARTIES:

APPLICANT:
Blacktown City Council

RESPONDENT:
Claus Reinhardt

FILE NUMBER(S):

41257 of 2007

CORAM:

Biscoe J

KEY ISSUES:

Civil Enforcement :- failure to comply with council order under s 121B Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

LEGISLATION CITED:

Blacktown Local Environmental Plan 1988 (NSW)
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 121B, 121ZK and 126(1)

DATES OF HEARING:

19 March 2008

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE:

19 March 2008

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:

APPLICANT:
Mr P Kelso
SOLICITORS
Bartier Perry

RESPONDENT:
Mr C Reinhardt (in person)
SOLICITORS
N/A

JUDGMENT:

THE LAND AND
ENVIRONMENT COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES

BISCOE J

19 March 2008

41257 of 2007

BLACKTOWN CITY COUNCIL v CLAUS REINHARDT

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

1 HIS HONOUR: This is a civil enforcement proceeding in Class 4 of the Court’s jurisdiction.

2 On 11 July 2007 the applicant Blacktown City Council served the respondent Claus Reinhardt with its order dated 10 July 2007 pursuant to s 121B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The order was addressed to Mr Reinhardt as the occupier of premises in Hobart Street, Wellington Street and Loftus Street, Riverstone, more particularly described in the order. The order recited that further to a council notice of 20 February 2007, a recent inspection of the premises had revealed that Mr Reinhardt had not ceased to permit the use of the premises for the purpose of the storage of motor vehicles, motor vehicle bodies and associated scrap and junk. Consequently, pursuant to s 121B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Mr Reinhardt was ordered to:

Remove all motor vehicles, motor vehicle bodies and associated scrap and junk from the premises the subject of this Order.

within 30 days of the date thereon. The notice referred to the possibility of the council extending the time for completion of the works; set out the reasons that the council had issued the order; and drew attention to ss 121ZK and 126(1) of the Act.

3 The property described in the order as “the premises” is zoned 1(a) General Rural under the Blacktown Local Environmental Plan 1988. The Plan prohibits junk yards in that zone and requires development consent for any purpose other than agriculture (other than intensive lot feeding of livestock).

4 Mr Reinhardt did not comply with the s 121B notice. An inspection of the property on 5 December 2007 revealed that a large quantity of motor vehicle wrecks and parts and associated scrap and junk still covered the property.

5 Mr Reinhardt has not appeared at the hearing this morning. Nor did he appear on an earlier hearing date on 4 March 2008. On that occasion the hearing was stood over until today because he had told the Court in a letter that he was unwell.

6 I am satisfied that the relief claimed in the Application should be granted. I grant that relief as follows:

1. Declaration that the use of the property described in the schedule (“ the property ”) for the storage of motor vehicles, motor vehicle bodies and associated scrap and junk is a breach of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 .
2. Order that the respondent move or cause to be removed from the property within two months from the date of this order all motor vehicles, motor vehicle bodies and associated scrap and junk, and restore the property to its previous condition to the satisfaction of the applicant.
3. Order that the respondent pay the applicant’s costs of this application.
Schedule

Hobart Street, Riverstone:
Lots 67-77, Section 14, DP 1480;

Wellington Street, Riverstone :
Lots 24-28, Section 14, DP 1480
Lots 64-79, Section 13, DP 1480; and
Land comprising the road reserve of Wellington Street, Riverstone adjoining the above lots.

Loftus Street, Riverstone
Lots 20-31, Section 13, DP 1480.

7 Shortly after I gave judgment and made the above orders, Mr Reinhardt arrived at Court. At my request, the solicitor for the applicant council returned to Court. I have now heard Mr Reinhardt. He has informed me that due to difficulties with the public transport system he was late in arriving at Court this morning. He indicated that he had been in negotiations with the council some time ago concerning removal of items from the property but the negotiations soured; that he would voluntarily clear the items off the property; and that they did not all belong to him. I informed him of the orders that I had made. He said that it would be impossible for him to comply with the two months requirement to remove these items from the property because he was only one man; he could not afford to have someone else remove the items; and what he did afforded him a living. He proposed six months. The solicitor for the council has agreed to a variation of order 2 by substituting the period of six months for the period of two months. Accordingly, I vary order 2 by substituting six months for the period of two months.