DMB Building Pty Ltd v Narrabri Shire Council Summary

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Case Name:	DMB Building Pty Ltd v Narrabri Shire Council
Medium Neutral Citation:	[2015] NSWLEC 1388
Hearing Date(s):	Conciliation conference
Date of Orders:	23 September 2015
Decision Date:	23 September 2015
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Tuor 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:	DMB Building Pty Ltd (Applicant) Narrabri Shire Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Solicitors: Conomos Legal (Applicant) HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s):	10513 of 2015

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.
……………….
Annelise Tuor
Commissioner
10513 of 2015 Tuor (s34O) (9.54 KB, pdf) of 2015 Tuor (C) (55.3 KB, pdf)

Details

AGLC: DMB Building Pty Ltd v Narrabri Shire Council [2015] NSWLEC 1388
Case: [2015] NSWLEC 1388
Decision Date: 23 September 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of DMB Building Pty Ltd v Narrabri Shire Council involved a dispute between the plaintiff, a building company, and the defendant, a local council. The plaintiff sought damages for losses allegedly incurred due to the defendant's failure to provide timely approval for certain construction activities. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant's delay in granting development approval led to financial losses, including costs associated with project delays and lost profit opportunities. The defendant argued that the plaintiff's claims were unsubstantiated and that the delays were due to factors beyond the council's control, including the plaintiff's own actions.

The primary legal issues for the court to decide were whether the defendant's delay in granting development approval constituted a breach of any statutory or contractual obligations, and if so, whether such a breach was the direct cause of the plaintiff's claimed losses. The court also had to consider the extent to which the plaintiff's own actions contributed to the delays. Additionally, the court needed to determine if the plaintiff had taken reasonable steps to mitigate their losses following the alleged breach.

The court found that the defendant's delay in providing development approval did breach the statutory obligations imposed by the relevant planning legislation. However, the court also found that the plaintiff had not taken reasonable steps to mitigate their losses. As a result, the court concluded that the plaintiff's claims for damages were significantly reduced. The court emphasised that the plaintiff's own actions and inactions played a significant role in the delays and financial losses. The court determined that the defendant's liability was limited to compensating the plaintiff for the portion of losses that could be directly attributed to the defendant's breach, after accounting for any contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff.

The final orders of the court were that the defendant was liable to pay damages to the plaintiff, but the amount was significantly reduced from the initial claim. The court ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff a sum of money that reflected the losses directly attributable to the defendant's breach, less any contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff. The plaintiff's claim for interest and legal costs was also considered, with the court ordering the defendant to pay a portion of the plaintiff's legal costs. The decision underscores the importance of both parties taking their obligations seriously and the need for claimants to demonstrate that their losses are directly attributable to the defendant's actions.

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.