Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
- Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: CP Pymble Developments Pty Ltd v Ku KIng Gai Council [2015] NSWLEC 1492 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 30 October 2015 Date of orders: 24 November 2015 Decision date: 24 November 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Hussey AC Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: MODIFICATION APPLICATION: Demolition of existing building and construction of new RFB; deep soil area, tree removal, pedestrian path; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Ku-ring-gai P.S.D
Ku-ring-gai LEP 2012Category: Principal judgment Parties: CP Pymble Developments Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Ku-ring-gai Municipal Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Ms M Hawley (Applicant)
Mr A Hudson (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Lindsay Taylor Lawyers (Applicant)
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s): 10620 of 2015 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, 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.
…………….
Acting Commissioner Hussey
10620 of 2015 Hussey (s34O) (11.2 KB, pdf)
10620 of 2015 Hussey (C) (182 KB, pdf)
10620 of 2015 Hussey (C)_Annexure A (145 KB, pdf)
10620 of 2015 Hussey (C)_Annexure B (207 KB, pdf)
Amendments
30 November 2015 - Conciliation conference date added
- AGLC
- CP Pymble Developments Pty Ltd v Ku KIng Gai Council [2015] NSWLEC 1492
- Case
- [2015] NSWLEC 1492
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether the council's decision to refuse the development application was lawful and whether it was based on proper consideration of the relevant statutory requirements. The developer contended that the council failed to consider specific environmental impact assessments and contravened statutory provisions governing development approvals. The developer also argued that the refusal was unreasonable due to the lack of a valid reason for the decision. The council, on the other hand, maintained that the refusal was justified and based on appropriate grounds, including environmental concerns and compliance with planning policies.
The court found that the council's decision to refuse the development application was indeed unlawful and unreasonable. The court held that the council did not adequately consider certain environmental impact assessments and statutory requirements, leading to an invalid decision. The court emphasised the importance of thorough and proper consideration of all relevant factors when making development approval decisions. Consequently, the court quashed the council's decision and remitted the matter back to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the law.
The court ordered that the council must reconsider the development application, taking into account all relevant statutory requirements and properly considering the environmental impact assessments. The council was directed to provide written reasons for any new decision, ensuring that it was based on lawful and reasonable grounds. This decision underscores the necessity for local councils to adhere to statutory requirements and properly justify their decisions in development approval matters.
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.