Land and Environment Court
of New South Wales
CITATION: Harwood Pty Ltd v Sydney City Council [2006] NSWLEC 523 PARTIES: APPLICANT
RESPONDENT
Harwood Pty Ltd
Sydney City CouncilFILE NUMBER(S): 10346 of 2006 CORAM: Tuor C KEY ISSUES: Appeal :- Order under s 121B-6 LEGISLATION CITED: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1975 DATES OF HEARING: 11/08/2006 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE: 08/11/2006 LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: APPLICANT
Mr A Booth, solicitorRESPONDENT
Mr M Fozzard, agent
JUDGMENT:
THE LAND AND
ENVIRONMENT COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
Tuor C
11 August 2006
JUDGMENT10346 of 2006 Harwood Pty Ltd v Sydney City Council
1 This is an appeal against an order under s121B-6 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (the order). The order was issued by the Sydney City Council (the Council) on 5 April 2006 for premises at 71 Elizabeth Bay Road, Elizabeth Bay (the site).
2 The Applicant has obtained expert evidence from Mr Trevor Howse. In response to this advice the parties have agreed on amendments to the wording of the order and are seeking Consent orders from the Court.
3 On the basis of the information placed before the Court I am satisfied that the issues in the Statement of Issues have been resolved and that the consent orders may be issued.
4 The orders of the Court by consent are:
___________________
It is noted that each party is to pay its own costs of the appeal.1) The appeal is upheld.
2) Pursuant to s 121(ZK) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 the terms and the period for compliance the respondent’s order dated 5 April 2006 are modified as set out in Annexure ‘A’.
3) The exhibits are retained.
Annelise Tuor
Commissioner of the Court
rjs
- AGLC
- Harwood Pty Ltd v Sydney City Council [2006] NSWLEC 523
- Case
- [2006] NSWLEC 523
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether the order issued by the Sydney City Council was valid and whether it complied with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1975. The court had to consider the evidence presented by the parties and the expert advice provided by Mr Trevor Howse. The court also had to determine whether the consent orders proposed by the parties were appropriate and whether they resolved the issues in the Statement of Issues.
The court found that the issues in the Statement of Issues had been resolved and that the consent orders proposed by the parties were appropriate. The court accepted the expert evidence provided by Mr Trevor Howse and was satisfied that the terms and period for compliance in the order issued by the Sydney City Council were modified as set out in Annexure ‘A’. The court noted that each party was to pay its own costs of the appeal. The court issued orders upholding the appeal, modifying the terms and period for compliance in the order, and retaining the exhibits.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.