Green v Hornsby Shire Council

Case [2025] NSWLEC 1756


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Green v Hornsby Shire Council [2025] NSWLEC 1756
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 17 October 2025
Date of orders: 21 October 2025
Decision date: 21 October 2025
Jurisdiction:Class 2
Before: O’Neill C
Decision:

The Court orders:

(1)  The appeal is upheld.

(2) An order that the Direction to Comply issued under the provisions of s 23 of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 (NSW) by the Respondent to the Applicant on 18 June 2025 (Attachment A) is amended as follows:

Under the heading of PERIOD FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE DIRECTION the following words are to be inserted:

Item 1 of the Scope of Works is to be carried out within 30 days of the date of this Order.

Catchwords:

DIRECTION – appeal against a Direction to Comply with specific measures regarding a swimming pool barrier – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders

Legislation Cited:

Land and Environment Court Act1979 (NSW), s 34

Swimming Pools Act1992 (NSW), ss 23, 26(1)(d)

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Samuel Green and Samantha Horlyck (Applicant)
Hornsby Shire Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
Self-represented (Applicant)
B Lennox (Solicitor) (Respondent)

Solicitors:
Storey & Gough (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2025/274847
Publication restriction: No

JUDGMENT

  1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to the provisions of s 26(1)(d) of the Swimming Pools Act1992 (NSW) (Swimming Pools Act), against a Direction to Comply issued by Hornsby Shire Council (the Council) under s 23 of the Swimming Pools Act regarding a swimming pool barrier at the residential property located at 12 Namoi Street North Epping (the site).

  2. The appeal was filed on 17 July 2025, within 28 days of the date of the Direction, in accordance with s 26(2) of the Swimming Pools Act.

  3. The appeal relates to item 1 of the Direction, as the Applicant elected to comply with items 2, 3 and 4 of the Direction.

  4. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 17 October 2025. I presided over the conciliation conference. At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision if the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.

  5. I am satisfied that the jurisdictional prerequisites to the exercise of the power to amend the Direction issued by the Council to the Applicant on 29 June 2025 pursuant to s 23 of the Swimming Pools Act have been met.

Orders

  1. The orders of the Court are:

  1. The appeal is upheld.

  2. An order that the Direction to Comply issued under the provisions of s 23 of the Swimming Pools Act1992 (NSW) by the respondent to the applicants on 18 June 2025 (Attachment A) is amended as follows: Under the heading of PERIOD FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE DIRECTION the following words are to be inserted: “Item 1 of the Scope of Works is to be carried out within thirty days of the date of this Order.”

Susan O’Neill

Commissioner of the Court

**********

Annexure A.863 KB.pdf

Details
AGLC
Green v Hornsby Shire Council [2025] NSWLEC 1756
Case
[2025] NSWLEC 1756
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Green v Hornsby Shire Council was a case heard by the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales. The Applicant, Green, sought to appeal a Direction to Comply issued by the Hornsby Shire Council (the Respondent). This Direction was made under the provisions of section 23 of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 (NSW), and required the Applicant to comply with a number of works related to the safety of a swimming pool located on their property. The Applicant argued that the time frame imposed for compliance was unreasonable and sought an amendment to the Direction.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the time frame for compliance set out in the Direction was reasonable, and if not, what the appropriate amendment should be. The Court considered the relevant statutory provisions, relevant case law and the facts of the case, including the nature and extent of the required works, the reasons for the Direction, and the resources available to the Applicant to complete the works. The Court also took into account the potential risks to public safety if the works were not completed in a timely manner.

The Court held that the time frame for compliance set out in the Direction was unreasonable and ordered that it be amended. The Court found that the required works were significant and would take considerable time to complete, and that the original time frame did not allow for any delays or unforeseen circumstances. The Court also noted that the risks to public safety if the works were not completed in a timely manner were significant, given the potential for accidents to occur at the swimming pool. The Court ordered that the time frame for compliance be amended to allow for a reasonable period of time to complete the required works. The Court also noted that the Respondent should have considered the Applicant's resources and ability to complete the works when setting the time frame for compliance.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Court orders:

(1) The appeal is upheld.

(2) An order that the Direction to Comply issued under the provisions of s 23 of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 (NSW) by the Respondent to the Applicant on 18 June 2025 (Attachment A) is amended as follows:

Under the heading of PERIOD FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE DIRECTION the following words are to be inserted:

Item 1 of the Scope of Works is to be carried out within 30 days of the date of this Order.

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.