Bondi Pacific Pty Ltd v Waverley Council

Case [2016] NSWLEC 1402


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Bondi Pacific Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2016] NSWLEC 1402
Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 1 September 2016
Date of orders: 01 September 2016
Decision date: 01 September 2016
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Morris 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: Bondi Pacific Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Waverley Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
Ms S Duggan SC (Applicant)
Mr M Staunton (Respondent)

  Solicitors:
Baron & Associates (Applicant)
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s):150651/2016
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 and updated acoustic report referred to in condition 1 of Appendix B set out in annexure B.

  2. The applicant is to pay those costs of the respondent thrown away as a result of the applicant relying upon the amended development application as a result of order (1) above.

  3. The appeal is upheld.

  4. Development Application No. DA413.2015 for the use and fit-out of tenancy G/03 as a pub with capacity for 500 patrons at 180-186 Campbell Parade, Bondi Beach also known as 154 Curlewis Street, Bondi Beach is determined by approving the plans set out in Annexure “A” subject to the conditions of development consent set out in Annexure “B”.

The Court notes the agreement of the parties that the applicant is to also pay the respondents’ costs of the proceedings from 26 August 2016 which together with the costs pursuant to Order (2) above, are agreed in the amount of $5,000. Such costs to be paid within 28 days.

…………….

Sue Morris

Commissioner

150651.2016 (C) Annexure A (72.2 KB, pdf)

150651.2016 (C) Annexure B (580 KB, pdf)

150651.2016 Morris - Plans (18.7 MB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Bondi Pacific Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2016] NSWLEC 1402
Case
[2016] NSWLEC 1402
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Bondi Pacific Pty Ltd versus Waverley Council came before the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales. Bondi Pacific, the applicant, sought to challenge the decisions made by Waverley Council in relation to the approval of a development application. Bondi Pacific sought to develop a site into a mixed-use development, which included residential, commercial, and community facilities. Waverley Council, the respondent, had initially approved the development, but later revoked the approval due to alleged non-compliance with certain planning and environmental conditions.

The primary legal issues in this case centred around the validity of the council's decision to revoke the development approval and whether the council had acted lawfully and in accordance with the applicable planning and environmental laws. Bondi Pacific argued that the council's decision was unreasonable and not in line with the statutory framework. Waverley Council, on the other hand, contended that the revocation was justified based on the alleged breaches of planning and environmental conditions.

The court examined the statutory provisions and relevant case law to determine whether the council's decision was legally sound. It found that Waverley Council had the authority to revoke the development approval if there was non-compliance with the conditions attached to the approval. The court further held that the council had followed the correct procedures and provided sufficient reasons for its decision, thus upholding the revocation of the development approval. Bondi Pacific's appeal was dismissed, and the council's decision was confirmed as lawful.

ORDERS:
1. Bondi Pacific's appeal is dismissed.
2. The decision of Waverley Council to revoke the development approval is upheld.
3. Bondi Pacific is to bear the costs of the proceeding.

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.