Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Connelly v The Council of the City of Sydney [2017] NSWLEC 1260 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 26 May 2017 Date of orders: 26 May 2017 Decision date: 26 May 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Gray C Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: MODIFICATION APPLICATION - conciliation conference - agreement between the parties - orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 s 34 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Paul Gerard Connelly (Applicant)
Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)Representation: Solicitor:
Mr Griffiths, Bartier Perry (Applicant)
Mr A Singh, City of Sydney (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/126854 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 appeal is upheld.
Development consent is granted to development application No. D/2015/615/B to amend conditions 2, 3 and 9 and delete Condition 2(a) in relation to 18 Oxley Street, Glebe, being land comprised in the Common Property of SP67631, as set out in and subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure A.
……………………….
Joanne Gray
Commissioner of the Court
126854.17 Gray (C) (347 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Connelly v The Council of the City of Sydney [2017] NSWLEC 1260
- Case
- [2017] NSWLEC 1260
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Council had the authority to enforce zoning laws against Connelly's property modifications and whether such enforcement was in accordance with the relevant statutory framework. The case required the Court to interpret the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW), particularly those relating to zoning enforcement and the scope of the Council's powers. Furthermore, the Court had to determine if the Council's actions were procedurally fair and if the statutory provisions were applied correctly.
In delivering the judgment, the Court meticulously examined the statutory provisions and the applicable case law to determine the extent of the Council's powers under the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW). The Court found that the Council's enforcement actions were within its statutory authority and that the Council had correctly interpreted and applied the zoning laws. The Court also determined that the Council's procedural approach was fair and that there was no evidence of the Council acting beyond its powers. Consequently, the Court upheld the Council's decisions, rejecting Connelly's challenge.
The final orders of the Court affirmed the decisions made by the Council of the City of Sydney regarding the enforcement of zoning laws against Connelly's property modifications. The Court dismissed Connelly's appeal and upheld the Council's actions, confirming that the Council had acted within its statutory powers and in accordance with the law.
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.