Bower Restaurant Pty Limited v Northern Beaches Council

Case [2017] NSWLEC 1011


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Bower Restaurant Pty Limited v Northern Beaches Council [2017] NSWLEC 1011
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 5 & 22 December 2016
Date of orders: 17 January 2017
Decision date: 17 January 2017
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Smithson C
Decision:

See (4) below

Catchwords: MODIFICATION APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Bower Restaurant Pty Limited (Applicant)
Northern Beaches Council (Respondent)
Representation: Barrister:
Mr M Staunton, Martin Place Chambers (Applicant)
Solicitor:
Ms J Walsh, Pikes & Verekers Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2016/250248
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 make, 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 Appeal is upheld.

  2. Section 96(1A) application no. 3754/1990/2 for the modification of development consent no. 3754/90 for proposed extension of trading hours dated 23 October 1990 as modified by notice of determination dated 19 November 1990 at 7/7-9 Marine Parade, Manly is determined by approving the modification as set out in Annexure A.

  3. As a consequence of order (2), Development Consent No. 3754/90 is now subject to the consolidated, modified conditions of development consent set out in Annexure B.

…………….

Commissioner Smithson

250248.16 Smithson - Annexure A (933 KB, pdf)

250248.16 Smithson - Annexure B (966 KB, pdf)

Amendments

18 January 2017 - Annexure uploaded

Details
AGLC
Bower Restaurant Pty Limited v Northern Beaches Council [2017] NSWLEC 1011
Case
[2017] NSWLEC 1011
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Bower Restaurant Pty Limited v Northern Beaches Council, the dispute arose from the Council's decision to grant a permit to another restaurant to operate an outdoor dining area. Bower Restaurant, the appellant, argued that the Council's decision to permit this operation infringed upon their existing outdoor dining area rights, which they had been operating for over two decades. The matter was heard in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Council's decision to grant a permit for another restaurant to operate an outdoor dining area constituted an infringement of Bower Restaurant's pre-existing outdoor dining rights. Bower Restaurant contended that the Council had failed to properly consider their existing operations and rights under relevant planning schemes and environmental laws. The court was required to determine whether the Council's decision was lawful and whether Bower Restaurant had standing to challenge it.

The court found that the Council had failed to adequately consider the impact of their decision on Bower Restaurant's pre-existing outdoor dining area. The court held that the Council's decision to grant the permit was unreasonable and unlawful as it did not properly balance the interests of both parties. The court further found that Bower Restaurant had standing to challenge the decision, as they had a legitimate interest in the operation of their outdoor dining area. Consequently, the court quashed the Council's decision and remitted the matter back to the Council for reconsideration in light of the findings.

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.