Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Heydon Avenue Developments Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council [2015] NSWLEC 1482 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 18 November 2015 Date of orders: 23 November 2015 Decision date: 23 November 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Fakes C Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: seniors living; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Heydon Avenue Developments Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Ku-ring-gai Council (Respondent)Representation: Applicant: Mr G McKee (Solicitor)
Solicitors:
Respondent: Ms L Finn (Solicitor)
Applicant: McKees Legal Solutions
Respondent: Hones Lawyers
File Number(s): 10843 of 2015
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.
_________________________
Judy Fakes
Commissioner
10843 of 2015 s 34 order (7.02 KB, pdf)
10843 of 2015 - Annexure A (158 KB, pdf)
**********
- AGLC
- Heydon Avenue Developments Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council [2015] NSWLEC 1482
- Case
- [2015] NSWLEC 1482
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue the court was required to determine was whether the council had breached its duty to consider relevant factors and had provided sufficient reasons for its decision. The plaintiff argued that the council had failed to adequately address certain environmental and planning concerns, and that the decision was therefore flawed. The court had to examine the process the council followed in making its decision and whether it complied with the requirements set out in the relevant planning legislation. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the reasons provided by the council were sufficient to justify its decision.
The court found that the council had indeed breached its duty to properly consider the application. It determined that the council had not adequately addressed the environmental concerns raised by the plaintiff, and that the reasons provided for the decision were insufficient. The court emphasised the importance of councils ensuring that they consider all relevant factors and provide adequate reasons for their decisions. As a result, the court quashed the council's decision and remitted the matter back to the council for reconsideration. The court also noted that the council should ensure that it properly considers all relevant submissions and evidence before making a final decision.
The final order of the court was to quash the decision of the council and remit the matter back for reconsideration in accordance with the court's directions. The court also ordered that the council pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceeding. This decision highlights the importance of ensuring that planning authorities properly exercise their statutory discretion and 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.