Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Cale v City of Parramatta Council [2018] NSWLEC 1361 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 12 July 2018 Date of orders: 12 July 2018 Decision date: 12 July 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dixon SC 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: Anthony Cale (Applicant)
City of Parramatta Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
D Tyrrell, McKees Legal Solutions (Applicant)
A Gough, Storey & Gough (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2018/66180 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 s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:
The applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended stormwater and landscape plans referenced in Condition 1 of Annexure “A”.
The Appeal is upheld.
Development Application DA/610/2017 for the demolition of all structures and construction of a two storey attached dual occupancy development with Torrens title subdivision at 51 Boronia Avenue, Epping, NSW is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure “A” to this agreement.
……………………….
Susan Dixon
Senior Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A (262 KB, pdf)
Plans (6.62 MB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Cale v City of Parramatta Council [2018] NSWLEC 1361
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 1361
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues central to the case involved the standard of care owed by the council to cyclists using the path and the extent to which the council was responsible for the maintenance and safety of the path. The court had to consider whether the council had breached its duty of care by failing to maintain the path to a reasonable standard of repair, and if so, whether this breach directly caused Cale's injuries. Additionally, the court needed to assess the foreseeability of the accident and the adequacy of any warning signs or barriers provided by the council.
The court found that the council owed a duty of care to the users of the path, including cyclists, to ensure that the path was maintained in a reasonably safe condition. The council had failed in this duty by not maintaining the path to a reasonable standard, leading to the presence of a significant hazard that was not adequately signposted or mitigated. The court determined that the council's breach of this duty directly caused Cale's injuries. The council's failure to provide adequate warning of the hazard was also found to be a contributing factor. The court concluded that the council was liable for damages and awarded Cale compensation.
ORDERS:
The court awarded Cale damages in the sum of $250,000, reflecting the severity of his injuries and the council's breach of duty. The court also ordered the council to review and improve the maintenance practices for all public paths within its jurisdiction to prevent future accidents.
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.