Hrsto v Canterbury City Council (No 2)

Hrsto brought an application against the Canterbury City Council, seeking a declaration that the council had unlawfully imposed a condition on the approval of a development application. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The application was brought following an earlier appeal to the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, which was dismissed. The court was required to determine whether the council had lawfully imposed the condition and whether the condition was consistent with the relevant planning scheme.

The court considered whether the council had the power to impose the condition and whether the condition was necessary for the protection of the public interest. The court found that the council did have the power to impose the condition and that the condition was necessary for the protection of the public interest. The court found that the condition was consistent with the relevant planning scheme and that the council had acted within its powers in imposing the condition. The court also found that the condition was not unreasonable and did not go beyond what was necessary to achieve the objective of the condition.

The court answered the separate question posed by the parties in the affirmative. The court found that the council had lawfully imposed the condition. The question of the costs of this hearing was reserved, and the matter was referred back to the Registrar for further directions. Exhibit C2 was ordered to be returned. The court did not make any further orders.