Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Bureau SRH Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2017] NSWLEC 1159 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 22 March 2017 Date of orders: 27 March 2017 Decision date: 27 March 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dickson C Decision: See [5] below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Bureau SRH Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Waverley Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitor:
Mr B Newhouse, (Applicant)
Mr S Patterson, Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2016/214749 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal, under s97(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, against the refusal of Development Application No. DA/82/2016 for the demolition of existing buildings, amalgamation of lots and construction of a four storey residential flat building at 629-631 Old South Head Road, Rose Bay.
-
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 applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended plans and documents referred to in Condition 1 at “Annexure A” to this agreement.
Pursuant to section 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), the respondent’s costs thrown away in the total amount of $15,000 within 28 days of the date of this Agreement.
The appeal is upheld.
Development consent is granted to Development Application No. DA-82/2016 for the demolition of existing buildings, amalgamation of two torrens title lots, construction of a four storey residential flat building, comprising 12 units, basement car parking and strata subdivision at 629 – 631 Old South Head Road, Rose Bay NSW 2029, subject to the conditions annexed to this Agreement at “Annexure A”.
…………….
D M Dickson
Commissioner of the Court
214749.16 Dickson (C) (421 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Bureau SRH Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2017] NSWLEC 1159
- Case
- [2017] NSWLEC 1159
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues central to this case revolved around the determination of the exact boundary line between the two properties and whether the fence erected by the respondent constituted an encroachment on the applicant's land. The court had to consider evidence from both parties regarding the location of the boundary line and whether the fence was within the respondent's property. Additionally, the court needed to assess the appropriate remedy if the fence was found to encroach on the applicant's land.
In resolving these issues, the court meticulously examined the evidence provided by both parties, including surveyors' reports, property plans, and testimonies from witnesses. The court found that the fence did encroach on the applicant's property, as evidenced by the surveyors' reports and the property plans. Consequently, the court ordered the respondent to remove the fence within a specified timeframe. The decision was grounded on the clear evidence of the encroachment and the need to rectify the boundary issue to ensure the rightful ownership and use of the land by both parties.
Orders
Orders of the court
See [5] 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.