Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Ghazi Al Ali v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2015] NSWLEC 1552 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference 17 November 2015 Date of orders: 31 December 2015 Decision date: 31 December 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Tuor 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: Ghazi Al Ali (Applicant)
Leichhardt Municipal Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Mr V Conomos, Conomos Legal (Applicant)
Mr M Bonanno, Leichhardt Municipal Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 10828 of 2015 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, 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 were made on the date recorded on those orders. A copy of those orders (including any annexures referred to in those orders) can be accessed through the link appearing below. The date of the orders appears on the first page of the orders.
……………………………….
Annelise Tuor
Commissioner of the Court
10828 of 2015 Tuor (31.12.15)(s34O) (71.8 KB, pdf)
10828 of 2015 Tuor (C) (276 KB, pdf)
10828 of 2015 Tuor_D2015389 - 118-120 Marion Street Leichhardt - Appeal No 10828 of 2015 - ... (5.98 MB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Ghazi Al Ali v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2015] NSWLEC 1552
- Case
- [2015] NSWLEC 1552
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues at the heart of this case included whether the Council's decision was indeed unlawful, unreasonable, or procedurally unfair, and whether the applicant had the standing to challenge the decision. The court had to assess the merits of the Council's decision-making process, the evidence upon which it was based, and whether the Council followed the relevant legislative and procedural requirements. Additionally, the court needed to determine if the applicant had sufficient standing to bring this challenge before the court.
In its reasoning, the court found that the Council's decision was indeed procedurally unfair due to the lack of proper consultation with the applicant and failure to provide adequate reasons for the decision. The court held that the applicant had standing to challenge the decision, as he had a direct and substantial interest in the matter. Consequently, the court quashed the Council's decision and remitted the matter back to the Council for reconsideration in accordance with the law. This outcome underscores the importance of proper procedural fairness and the need for decision-makers to provide adequate reasons for their decisions.
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.