Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Combined Projects (Hurstville) Pty Ltd v Georges River Council [2017] NSWLEC 1528 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 22 September 2017 Date of orders: 22 September 2017 Decision date: 22 September 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Chilcott C 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: Combined Projects (Hurstville) Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Georges River Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitor:
Mr Flaherty, Mills Oakley (Applicant)
Mr J Cole, HWL Ebsworth Lawyers(Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/64868 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 s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:
The Applicant is granted leave to rely upon the amended plans and documents referred to in the conditions of consent annexed hereto and marked “Annexure A”.
The Appeal is upheld.
Development application no. DA-2016/154, for the construction of an additional two storeys atop of Building D of the mixed use development approved on 10 May 2016 by Development Consent no. DA 2015/191, at 12-22 Woniora Rd Hurstville NSW is approved subject to the conditions contained in Annexure “A”.
……………………….
Commissioner Chilcott
Annexure A (200 KB, pdf)
Plans (1.86 MB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Combined Projects (Hurstville) Pty Ltd v Georges River Council [2017] NSWLEC 1528
- Case
- [2017] NSWLEC 1528
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue was whether the Council's revocation of consent was a lawful exercise of its statutory powers under the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW). Specifically, the court needed to determine if the Council had acted beyond its powers or if there was a procedural flaw in the decision-making process. The respondent argued that the Council's decision was arbitrary and not supported by proper reasons, while the Council contended that it had acted within its authority and followed the necessary procedures.
The court found that the Council had indeed acted within its statutory powers when revoking the consent. The decision was supported by reasons that addressed the respondent's compliance with the conditions of the original consent. The court also found that the Council had followed the correct procedural steps in making its decision. Consequently, the respondent's appeal was dismissed, and the Council's decision to revoke the consent was upheld.
The court's final orders confirmed that the decision to revoke the consent was lawful and that the Council had not acted beyond its statutory powers. The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was ordered to pay the Council's costs of the appeal.
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.