Charalambous v Randwick City Council - [2025] NSWLEC 1602

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Charalambous v Randwick City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1602
Hearing dates: Conciliation conferences on 5 August 2025
Date of orders: 22 August 2025
Decision date: 22 August 2025
Jurisdiction: Class 1
Before: Porter C
Decision:
The Court orders:
(1) The appeal is upheld.
(2) Development Application No. DA/632/2024 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a six storey co-living development with basement parking, storage and services at 129 and 129A Barker Street, Randwick NSW and 1 Maud Street, Randwick NSW is determined by the grant of consent subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure A.

Catchwords:
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION — co-living — conciliation conference — agreement between the parties — orders

Legislation Cited:
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss, 8.7, 4.15
Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 34
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, s 38
Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012, cll 2.3, 2.7, 4.3, 4.4, 4.6, 5.21, 6.2, 6.4, 6.10, 6.11
State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, Ch 2
State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021, ss 68, 69
State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6
State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021, s 2.48

Cases Cited:
Al Maha Pty Ltd v Huajun Investments Pty Ltd (2018) 233 LGERA 170; [2018] NSWCA 245
McMillan v Taylor (2023) 111 NSWLR 634; [2023] NSWCA 183

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Costa Charalambous (Applicant)
Randwick City Council (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
A Pickles SC (Applicant)
J Ede (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Boskovitz Lawyers (Applicant)
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2024/328755
Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

COMMISSIONER: This is a Class 1 development appeal pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EPA Act) against the deemed refusal of development application 632/2024. The development application seeks consent for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a six storey co-living development with basement parking, storage and services (DA) at 129 and 129A Barker Street, Randwick legally described as Lot 1 and 2 of DP 501835 and 1 Maud Street, Randwick legally described as lot 4, 5 and 6 of DP 1221.

Request for hearing adjournment and conciliation conference

The hearing commenced on site on 5 August 2025 where the Court heard from six objectors. After hearing from objectors, the parties advised the Court that based on the joint expert reporting and foreshadowed amendments to the DA, no issues remained in contention. On this basis, the parties requested a conciliation conference.
The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on the same day. The parties’ agreement was filed 5 August 2025.
The Respondent, as the relevant consent authority, has agreed under s 38 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 to the Applicant amending DA-632/2024 in accordance with the documents contained at Annexure B (amended…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Charalambous v Randwick City Council and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] NSWLEC 1602
Decision Date: 22 August 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Charalambous v Randwick City Council involved a dispute between the applicant, Charalambous, and the Council over the approval of a development application for the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a six-storey co-living development. The application was made under the Planning Act and was ultimately refused by the Council. Charalambous appealed this decision to the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues for the Court to determine were whether the Council's refusal of the development application was lawful and whether the applicant had demonstrated that the proposed development was consistent with the local planning framework. This included consideration of whether the proposed development complied with the relevant zoning and development controls, and whether the Council had valid reasons for refusing the application. The Court also needed to assess the merits of the proposed development in the context of the local community and urban planning objectives.

The Court found that the Council's refusal of the development application was not supported by sufficient evidence and was therefore invalid. The Court held that the proposed development was consistent with the objectives of the local planning framework and would not have an undue impact on the surrounding environment or community. The Court noted that the proposed development would provide much-needed co-living accommodation in a densely populated area and would contribute to the local economy. The Court also found that the applicant had adequately addressed the Council's concerns about the proposed development and had provided sufficient evidence to support the approval of the application. The Court concluded that the development application should be approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure A.

The Court ordered that the appeal be upheld and that the development application be granted subject to the specified conditions. This decision ensures that the proposed co-living development can proceed, providing valuable housing and contributing positively to the local community.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Court orders:

(1) The appeal is upheld.

(2) Development Application No. DA/632/2024 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a six storey co-living development with basement parking, storage and services at 129 and 129A Barker Street, Randwick NSW and 1 Maud Street, Randwick NSW is determined by the grant of consent subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure A.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Charalambous v Randwick City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1602
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conferences on 5 August 2025
Date of orders:	22 August 2025
Decision date:	22 August 2025
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Porter C
Decision:	The Court orders: (1) The appeal is upheld. (2) Development Application No. DA/632/2024 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a six storey co-living development with basement parking, storage and services at 129 and 129A Barker Street, Randwick NSW and 1 Maud Street, Randwick NSW is determined by the grant of consent subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure A.
Catchwords:	DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION — co-living — conciliation conference — agreement between the parties — orders
Legislation Cited:	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss, 8.7, 4.15 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 34 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, s 38 Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012, cll 2.3, 2.7, 4.3, 4.4, 4.6, 5.21, 6.2, 6.4, 6.10, 6.11 State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, Ch 2 State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021, ss 68, 69 State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6 State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021, s 2.48
Cases Cited:	Al Maha Pty Ltd v Huajun Investments Pty Ltd (2018) 233 LGERA 170; [2018] NSWCA 245 McMillan v Taylor (2023) 111 NSWLR 634; [2023] NSWCA 183
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Costa Charalambous (Applicant) Randwick City Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: A Pickles SC (Applicant) J Ede (Solicitor) (Respondent) Solicitors: Boskovitz Lawyers (Applicant) Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2024/328755
Publication restriction:	Nil