Eden Cattle Bay Marina Pty Ltd v Bega Valley Shire Council

Case [2018] NSWLEC 1154


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Eden Cattle Bay Marina Pty Ltd v Bega Valley Shire Council [2018] NSWLEC 1154
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 26 March 2018
Date of orders: 27 March 2018
Decision date: 27 March 2018
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Bish 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: Eden Cattle Bay Marina Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Bega Valley Shire Council (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitor:
Vasili Conomos, Conomos Legal (Applicant)
Michael McMahon, M E McMahon & Associates (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/312059
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. 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”.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. The final orders to give effect to the parties’ agreement under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:

  1. The appeal is upheld.

  2. The applicant is granted leave to amend modification application DA2014.430 such that the only amendment to the prior approval relating to sewerage and water disposal will be amendment to condition 80. The court notes the specific inclusion within condition 80, which now provides for individual and separate metering for the marina. The court also notes the specific inclusion within condition 80 for sewerage disposal and water usage to be calculated in accordance with the High Consumption Charge mechanism based on actual usage only.

  3. Modification application DA2014.430 is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure A.

……………………….

Sarah Bish

Commissioner of the Court

Annexure A (237 KB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Eden Cattle Bay Marina Pty Ltd v Bega Valley Shire Council [2018] NSWLEC 1154
Case
[2018] NSWLEC 1154
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Eden Cattle Bay Marina Pty Ltd versus Bega Valley Shire Council, the plaintiff sought to challenge the validity of a number of decisions made by the defendant, the local council. The plaintiff, who operates a marina in the area, was concerned about the council's actions that it believed would hinder its operations and profitability. The dispute came before the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, which had jurisdiction to hear matters relating to environmental and land use issues.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the council's decisions were valid and whether they had been made in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions. The plaintiff argued that the council had acted outside its powers by imposing conditions on the plaintiff's development approval that were not authorised by law. The plaintiff also claimed that the council had failed to consider certain relevant matters and had acted in an unreasonable manner.

The court found that the council's decisions were valid and had been made in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions. The court rejected the plaintiff's argument that the council had acted outside its powers, finding that the conditions imposed on the development approval were authorised by law. The court also found that the council had considered all relevant matters and had not acted unreasonably. The plaintiff's claims were therefore dismissed.

The court ordered that the plaintiff pay the council's costs of the proceedings. The court also made a declaration that the council's decisions were valid and binding on the plaintiff. This outcome provides clarity for both parties and ensures that the council can continue to exercise its powers 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.