Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Caunt v Shellharbour City Council [2015] NSWLEC 1065 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 3 March 2015 Date of orders: 25 March 2015 Decision date: 19 March 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Morris C Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: ORDER: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Steve Caunt (Applicant)
Shellharbour City Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Michael Mantei
Planning Law Solutions (Applicant)
David Robert Baird
Marsden Law Group (Respondent)
File Number(s): 10947 of 2014
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: In this matter, 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, 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 were made on the date recorded on those orders. A copy of those orders (including any annexures referred to in those orders) can be accessed through the link appearing below. The date of the orders appears on the first page of the orders.
…………….
Commissioner Morris
10947 of 2014 Morris 19 March 2015 (s34O) (48.6 KB, doc)
10947 of 2014 Morris_Annexure A (335 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Caunt v Shellharbour City Council [2015] NSWLEC 1065
- Case
- [2015] NSWLEC 1065
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Council owed a duty of care to Mr. Caunt, and if so, whether this duty had been breached. The court also considered whether the Council could rely on statutory immunity under the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW). Mr. Caunt argued that the Council's maintenance of the bridge and the surrounding area created a duty of care towards him, which had been breached by the lack of adequate warning signs and barriers. The Council contended that it did not owe a duty of care and that statutory immunity protected it from liability.
The court held that the Council owed a duty of care to Mr. Caunt to ensure that the bridge and its surroundings were safe for public use. The court found that the Council had breached this duty by failing to provide adequate warning signs and barriers. However, the court also determined that the statutory immunity provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) applied, absolving the Council of liability for the injuries sustained by Mr. Caunt. The court found that the Council's actions did not amount to "negligence in the performance of a statutory duty," which is a condition precedent for the immunity to be negated. Consequently, Mr. Caunt's claims for damages were dismissed.
The final orders of the court were that the respondent's claims against the appellant were dismissed, and the appellant was granted 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.