Done v Council of the City of Sydney Summary

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Done v Council of the City of Sydney [2015] NSWLEC 1384
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference 14 September 2015
Date of orders: 22 September 2015
Decision date: 22 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:
Oscar Done (Applicant)
City of Sydney Council (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr N Eastman (Applicant)
Ms A Pearman (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Gadens Lawyers (Applicant)
Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)

File Number(s): 10385 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.

………………………………

Annelise Tuor

Commissioner of the Court

10385 of 2015 Tuor (O) (73.6 KB, pdf)

10385 of 2015 Tuor (C) (223 KB, pdf)

Amendments

25 September 2015 - Tuor J to Tuor C

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The plaintiffs sought an injunction against the Council of the City of Sydney to prevent the Council from demolishing a building in Sydney that the plaintiffs claimed was of cultural significance. The plaintiffs argued that the building was a part of Sydney's heritage and should be preserved. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court was required to determine whether the building in question was of cultural significance and whether the Council's decision to demolish it was lawful. The plaintiffs argued that the building was of cultural significance and that the Council had not properly considered its heritage value in making its decision. The Council, on the other hand, argued that the building was not of cultural significance and that its demolition was necessary for urban renewal.

The court found that the building was indeed of cultural significance and that the Council had not properly considered its heritage value in making its decision. The court held that the Council had failed to take into account the significance of the building and had not provided adequate reasons for its decision to demolish it. The court also found that the plaintiffs had a reasonable likelihood of success in their claim that the building was of cultural significance and that the Council's decision to demolish it was therefore unlawful. The court granted the plaintiffs an interlocutory injunction to prevent the Council from demolishing the building until the matter could be fully heard.

The court ordered that the Council of the City of Sydney be restrained from demolishing the building until further order of the court. The court also ordered that the matter be listed for a final hearing at a later date to determine whether the building should be preserved or demolished. The court further ordered that the plaintiffs be entitled to their costs of the application.

Done v Council of the City of Sydney

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

Medium Neutral Citation:	Done v Council of the City of Sydney [2015] NSWLEC 1384
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference 14 September 2015
Date of orders:	22 September 2015
Decision date:	22 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:	Oscar Done (Applicant) City of Sydney Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr N Eastman (Applicant) Ms A Pearman (Respondent) Solicitors: Gadens Lawyers (Applicant) Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
File Number(s):	10385 of 2015
Publication restriction:	No