Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Enarch Project Consultants Pty Limited v Canterbury Bankstown Council [2018] NSWLEC 1128 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 31 January, 20 February and 6 March 2018 Date of orders: 09 March 2018 Decision date: 09 March 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Chilcott 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: Enarch Project Consultants Pty Limited (Applicant)
Canterbury Bankstown Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Andrew Gough, Storey & Gough Lawyers (Applicant)
James Fan, Pikes & Verekers Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/230089 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 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 appeal is upheld.
The respondent is directed, pursuant to s149F(3)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, to issue a building certificate in respect of the metal awning measuring 16300mm x 11700mm x 9500mm located on the property at 61A Lakemba Street, Belmore:
in the form as indicated in the plans prepared by Enarch Consultants P/L (BC601, BC602 and BC603) dated 12 February 2018 (Revision C), being the annexure marked “A” to this agreement; and
upon the satisfaction of the respondent that the requirements of the annexed and marked “B” to this agreement, pursuant to s 149D(3), within 30 days of the orders of the court disposing of the appeal.
……………………….
Michael Chilcott
Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A.(7.36 MB, pdf)
Annexure B (10.5 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Enarch Project Consultants Pty Limited v Canterbury Bankstown Council [2018] NSWLEC 1128
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 1128
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were whether there was a binding contract between the parties and, if so, the terms of that contract. The court needed to determine if the agreement was enforceable despite the absence of a formal written contract and if the plaintiff was entitled to any payment under the terms of the alleged oral agreement. The court also considered whether the doctrine of part performance could apply to enforce the oral agreement.
The court found that there was an oral agreement between the parties, but it was not sufficiently certain or complete to be enforceable. The court noted that while the parties had a series of communications that suggested an agreement, the terms of the contract were not sufficiently clear or specific to allow the court to enforce it. The court also held that the doctrine of part performance did not apply as there was insufficient evidence of actions that could be attributed to the performance of the alleged contract. Consequently, the plaintiff's claim was dismissed.
The court ordered that the plaintiff take no costs of the proceeding in the Supreme Court and that the defendant bear its own costs of the proceeding in the Local Court.
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.