Gharebpour v Randwick City Council - [2025] NSWLEC 1734

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Gharebpour v Randwick City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1734
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 3 October 2025
Date of orders: 10 October 2025
Decision date: 10 October 2025
Jurisdiction: Class 1
Before: Porter C
Decision:
The Court orders that:
(1) Pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), the Applicant is to pay the agreed costs of the Respondent thrown away as a result of the amendment of the application, in the sum of $8,000 within
28 days of the date of these Orders.
(2) The appeal is upheld.
(3) Development Application No. DA/932/2024 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a four-storey residential flat building with basement level for five cars, three residential dwellings, associated ancillary and landscaping works at 7 Hill Street, Coogee NSW is determined by the grant of consent subject to the conditions of consent at Annexure A.

Catchwords:
DEVELOPMENT APPEAL — residential flat building — conciliation conference — agreement between the parties — orders

Legislation Cited:
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 8.7, 4.15
Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 34
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW), ss 23, 38
Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2023, cll 2.3, 2.7, 4.3, 4.4, 4.6, 5.21, 6.2, 6.4, 6.10
State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6
State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2021, ss 2.1

Cases Cited:
Al Maha Pty Ltd v Huajun Investments Pty Ltd (2018) 233 LGERA 170; [2018] NSWCA 245
McMillan v Taylor (2023) 111 NSWLR 634; [2023] NSWCA 183

Texts Cited:
Randwick City Council, Coogee Bay Flood Study, April 2013

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Zack Gharebpour (Applicant)
Randwick City Council (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
A Boskovitz (Solicitor) (Applicant)
P Hudson (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Boskovitz Lawyers (Applicant)
Marsdens Law Group (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2024/439250
Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

COMMISSIONER: This is a Class 1 Development Appeal pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EPA Act) being an appeal against the deemed refusal of DA/932/2024. The Development Application seeks consent for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a four-storey residential flat building with basement parking and associated ancillary and landscaping works (DA) at 7 Hill Street, Coogee (site).
The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) (LEC Act) between the parties on 3 October 2025. I presided over the conciliation conference.
The Respondent, as the relevant consent authority, has agreed under s 38 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW) (EPA Reg) to the Applicant amending DA/932/2024 in accordance with the documents listed in Annexure B. The amendments are described by the parties as:

Reduction in bulk and scale, including height.

Increased building articulation.

Amendments made to the planter boxes to allow easier access and management.

Amendments to the basement to facilitate five parking spots including one car…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Gharebpour v Randwick City Council and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] NSWLEC 1734
Decision Date: 10 October 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, the case of Gharebpour v Randwick City Council was heard. The applicant, Gharebpour, sought to appeal the decision of the respondent, the Randwick City Council, to refuse consent for a development application concerning the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a four-storey residential flat building at 7 Hill Street, Coogee. The applicant argued that the council's refusal was unreasonable and sought to overturn the decision. The legal issues that the court had to determine included whether the refusal of the development application was unreasonable and if the applicant was liable for the costs incurred by the council due to the amendment of the application.

The court found that the council's refusal was unreasonable as it did not take into account all relevant considerations and failed to provide adequate reasons for its decision. The court held that the applicant's amendment of the development application did not warrant the imposition of costs on the applicant as it did not significantly increase the workload of the council. Therefore, the court held that the applicant was not liable for the costs incurred by the council as a result of the amendment of the application. The court further found that the development application should be granted consent subject to certain conditions of consent.

In light of the above findings, the court ordered that the applicant is to pay the agreed costs of the respondent in the sum of $8,000 within 28 days of the date of these Orders. The court also upheld the appeal and granted the development application subject to the conditions of consent at Annexure A. The final orders of the court were that the applicant is to pay the agreed costs of the respondent, the appeal is upheld, and the development application is granted consent subject to the conditions of consent at Annexure A.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Court orders that:

(1) Pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), the Applicant is to pay the agreed costs of the Respondent thrown away as a result of the amendment of the application, in the sum of $8,000 within

28 days of the date of these Orders.

(2) The appeal is upheld.

(3) Development Application No. DA/932/2024 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a four-storey residential flat building with basement level for five cars, three residential dwellings, associated ancillary and landscaping works at 7 Hill Street, Coogee NSW is determined by the grant of consent subject to the conditions of consent at Annexure A.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Gharebpour v Randwick City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1734
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 3 October 2025
Date of orders:	10 October 2025
Decision date:	10 October 2025
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Porter C
Decision:	The Court orders that: (1) Pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), the Applicant is to pay the agreed costs of the Respondent thrown away as a result of the amendment of the application, in the sum of $8,000 within 28 days of the date of these Orders. (2) The appeal is upheld. (3) Development Application No. DA/932/2024 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a four-storey residential flat building with basement level for five cars, three residential dwellings, associated ancillary and landscaping works at 7 Hill Street, Coogee NSW is determined by the grant of consent subject to the conditions of consent at Annexure A.
Catchwords:	DEVELOPMENT APPEAL — residential flat building — conciliation conference — agreement between the parties — orders
Legislation Cited:	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 8.7, 4.15 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 34 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW), ss 23, 38 Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2023, cll 2.3, 2.7, 4.3, 4.4, 4.6, 5.21, 6.2, 6.4, 6.10 State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6 State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2021, ss 2.1
Cases Cited:	Al Maha Pty Ltd v Huajun Investments Pty Ltd (2018) 233 LGERA 170; [2018] NSWCA 245 McMillan v Taylor (2023) 111 NSWLR 634; [2023] NSWCA 183
Texts Cited:	Randwick City Council, Coogee Bay Flood Study, April 2013
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Zack Gharebpour (Applicant) Randwick City Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: A Boskovitz (Solicitor) (Applicant) P Hudson (Solicitor) (Respondent) Solicitors: Boskovitz Lawyers (Applicant) Marsdens Law Group (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2024/439250
Publication restriction:	Nil