Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Crest No1 Pty Limited v Liverpool City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1122 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 18 December 2017; 30 January 2018; 6, 16 & 28 February 2018 and 9 March 2018 Date of orders: 09 March 2018 Decision date: 09 March 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dickson C Decision: See (5) below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008Category: Principal judgment Parties: Crest No1 Pty Limited (Applicant)
Liverpool City Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitor:
Anthony Boskovitz, Boskovitz & Associates Solicitors (Applicant)
Elizabeth Espinosa, Liverpool City Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/242419 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the actual refusal by Liverpool City Council of development application DA-989/2016. The application sought consent for Lot consolidation and construction of a 10 storey residential flat building containing 26 residential apartments over two levels of basement for 20 vehicles. The works are proposed at 48 Speed Street, Liverpool.
-
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 given leave to rely on the following plans:
Architectural Plans
Description
Drawing No.
Date
Prepared by
Cover page
01
Jan 18
Baini Design
Compliance Table
02
Jan 18
Baini Design
Basements 1 - 2
03
Jan 18
Baini Design
Site Plan / Ground Floor
04
Jan 18
Baini Design
Levels 1-3
05
Jan 18
Baini Design
Levels 4 & 5
06
Jan 18
Baini Design
Level 6
07
Jan 18
Baini Design
Elevations 1
10
09/02/18
Baini Design
Elevations 2
11
09/02/18
Baini Design
Elevations 3
12
09/02/18
Baini Design
3D views 1
13
09/02/18
Baini Design
3D views 2
14
09/02/18
Baini Design
3D views 3
15
09/02/18
Baini Design
Perspective 2
16
09/02/18
Baini Design
Roof Plan
17
09/02/18
Baini Design
Landscape Plans
Description
Drawing No.
Date
Prepared by
Landscape plan – Ground Floor
1438.GD.01
12/02/18
Greenland Design Pty Ltd
Landscape Plan – Level 6
1438.GD.02
12/02/18
Greenland Design Pty Ltd
Landscape Details & Specification
1438.GD.03
12/02/18
Greenland Design Pty Ltd
The Applicant is to pay the costs of the Respondent thrown away as a result of amending the development application pursuant to section 97B(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the amount of $2,000.
The appeal is upheld.
The requests to vary the Building Street frontage and Building Separation controls in Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 are upheld.
Development consent is granted to Development Application No. DA989/2016 for the lot consolidation and construction of a part 4 and part 7 storey residential flat building containing 17 residential apartments (6x studio, 7x 1-bedrom & 4x2 bedroom) and two levels of basement for 16 vehicles on the land described as Lots 45 in DP568886 and Lot 2 in DP 621948 with the street address of 48 Speed Street, Liverpool subject to the conditions of consent annexed hereto and marked “A”.
……………………….
D M Dickson
Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A (167 KB, pdf)
Annexure B (8.87 MB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Crest No1 Pty Limited v Liverpool City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1122
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 1122
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Council's approval of the development application was procedurally flawed, and if so, whether this rendered the approval invalid. The Court had to consider whether the Council's failure to provide Crest No 1 with an opportunity to respond to a revised planning report amounted to a failure to follow procedural fairness, and whether such a failure rendered the approval invalid. The Court also had to consider whether Crest No 1 had standing to bring the proceedings.
The Court found that the Council's approval of the development application was indeed procedurally flawed, as the Council had failed to provide Crest No 1 with an opportunity to respond to the revised planning report before approving the development. The Court held that this procedural irregularity amounted to a failure of procedural fairness, rendering the approval invalid. The Court further found that Crest No 1 had standing to bring the proceedings, as it had suffered injury as a result of the Council's actions. The Court granted Crest No 1 the declaration and injunction it sought, and ordered the Council to pay damages to Crest No 1.
The Court also ordered the Council to pay Crest No 1's costs of the proceedings, and stayed the enforcement of the injunction until the Council had an opportunity to appeal the decision. The Court held that the Council's approval of the development application was invalid due to the procedural irregularity, and that Crest No 1 was entitled to the relief it sought. The Court's decision provides guidance on the importance of procedural fairness in development approvals, and the consequences of failing to follow proper procedures.
Orders
Orders of the court
See (5) 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.