Fenech v The Council of the City of Sydney

Case [2016] NSWLEC 1530


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Fenech v The Council of the City of Sydney [2016] NSWLEC 1530
Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 31 October 2016
Date of orders: 09 November 2016
Decision date: 09 November 2016
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Morris 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: Yue Ping Fenech (Applicant)
The Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
Mr M Cottom
HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (Applicant)
Mr T Ward
The Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
File Number(s):184610/2016 and 292049/2016
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, 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:

  5. In Matter No. 18410/2016:

  1. The appeal is upheld.

  2. Pursuant to section 121ZK(4)(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the order issued by the respondent dated 18 May 2016 is substituted by an order in the terms set out in Annexure A.

  1. In Matter No. 292049/2016:

  1. The appeal is upheld;

  2. Pursuant to section 149F(3)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the respondent is direct to issue a building certificate forthwith upon the applicant complying with the order substituted by the Court for the respondent’s order dated 18 May in the final orders made by the Court in related proceedings 184610 of 2016.

………………..

Sue Morris

Commissioner

184610.16 & 292049.16 - Annexure A (356 KB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Fenech v The Council of the City of Sydney [2016] NSWLEC 1530
Case
[2016] NSWLEC 1530
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Fenech v The Council of the City of Sydney involved the appellant, Mr Fenech, contesting a decision by the respondent council to refuse him an exemption to build a swimming pool in his backyard, citing the Local Government Act 1993. The dispute was brought to the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Mr Fenech argued that the council's refusal was unreasonable and that the exemption should be granted. The legal issues before the court were whether the council's decision was lawful and whether the council had considered all relevant factors in making its decision.

The court examined the legislative framework and case law to determine the standard of review applicable to the council's decision. It assessed whether the decision was made in accordance with the relevant legislation and whether the council had exercised its discretion appropriately. The court held that the council had failed to adequately consider the benefits of the swimming pool and the impact on the local community. It found that the decision was unreasonable as it did not take into account all relevant factors and failed to provide adequate reasons. Consequently, the court quashed the council's decision and remitted the matter back to the council for reconsideration.

In light of the findings, the court ordered that the council reconsider the application for the exemption, taking into account all relevant factors and providing clear reasons for its decision. The council was directed to ensure that the decision-making process complied with the applicable statutory requirements. The court did not grant any further relief as it considered the reconsideration by the council to be sufficient. This decision highlights the importance of thorough and reasoned decision-making in local government matters and the need for councils to consider all relevant factors when exercising their discretion.

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.