Frank Lopresti Investments Pty Ltd v Campbelltown City Council

Case [2018] NSWLEC 1329


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Frank Lopresti Investments Pty Ltd v Campbelltown City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1329
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 9 April 2018; 9 and 25 May 2018; 1 and 7 June 2018
Date of orders: 29 June 2018
Decision date: 29 June 2018
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Dickson C
Decision:

See [5] below

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Frank Lopresti Investments Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Campbelltown City Council (Respondent)
Representation: Counsel:
A Hemmings (Applicant)
Solicitors:
Clayton Utz (Applicant)
K Gerathy, HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/316349
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal by Frank Lopresti Investments Pty Ltd against the actual refusal by Campbelltown City Council of Development Application No. 2400/2015/DA-S for subdivision of Lot 34 in DP 262269 Epping Forest, Mississippi Crescent, Kearns into five (5) Torrens titled residential allotments.

  2. 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”.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. The final orders to give effect to the parties’ agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:

  1. The Applicant is granted leave to rely upon the amended development application comprising the documents set out in Schedule A.

  2. The Appeal is upheld.

  3. Development Application 240/2015/DA-S as amended, for subdivision of land described as Lot 34 in DP 262269 located at Mississippi Crescent, Kearns is approved subject to the conditions of consent set out in Annexure "A".

  4. The documents set out in Schedule A are to be retained.

……………………….

D M Dickson

Commissioner of the Court

Annexure A (102 KB, pdf)

Schedule A (12.0 KB, pdf)

Schedule A (Item 1) (1.02 MB, pdf)

Schedule A (Item 2) (363 KB, pdf)

Schedule A (Item 3) (5.06 MB, pdf)

Schedule A (Item 4) (7.39 MB, pdf)

Schedule A (Item 5) (59.7 KB, pdf)

Schedule A (Item 6) (11.4 MB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Frank Lopresti Investments Pty Ltd v Campbelltown City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1329
Case
[2018] NSWLEC 1329
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Frank Lopresti Investments Pty Ltd v Campbelltown City Council, Frank Lopresti Investments, the respondent, sought to challenge the decision of Campbelltown City Council, the appellant, to deny their application for a development approval for a site located at 108-110 Queen Street, Campbelltown. The Council argued that the site did not comply with the relevant provisions of the Campbelltown Local Environment Plan 2011. The dispute was heard by the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, which held jurisdiction under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW). The matter was ultimately appealed to the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The legal issues before the court included whether the site complied with the zoning requirements and whether the Council had correctly applied the relevant planning laws in denying the application. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the site met the criteria for development under the Campbelltown Local Environment Plan 2011 and whether the Council's decision was lawful, rational, and based on appropriate consideration of the evidence.

The court examined the evidence and submissions presented by both parties and concluded that the Council had correctly determined that the site did not comply with the zoning requirements. The court found that the Council had appropriately applied the planning laws in denying the development approval. The court emphasised the importance of adhering to zoning provisions and highlighted that the Council's decision was based on a comprehensive assessment of the site's compliance with the relevant planning instruments. The appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the Land and Environment Court was upheld.

The court ordered that Frank Lopresti Investments' appeal be dismissed, and the decision of the Land and Environment Court, denying the development approval, be upheld. Costs were awarded against the respondent.

Orders

Orders of the court

See [5] 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.