Huajun Investments Pty Ltd v City of Canada Bay Council

[2018] NSWLEC 1087

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

• Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation:	Huajun Investments Pty Ltd v City of Canada Bay Council [2018] NSWLEC 1087
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 15 and 20 February 2018
Date of orders:	26 February 2018
Decision date:	26 February 2018
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Smithson 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:	Huajun Investments Pty Ltd (Applicant) City of Canada Bay Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr Staunton (Applicant) Dr Smith (Respondent) Solicitors: Dentons Australia (Applicant) Maddocks Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2017/131433
Publication restriction:	No

Judgment

1. 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”.

2. 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.

3. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to make, and have not made, any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.

4. The final orders to give effect to the parties’ agreement under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:

1. The Applicant is granted leave to further amend its application, and the plans filed with the Court on 6 November 2017, in accordance with the schedule of plans included in the attached conditions at Condition 1.

2. The appeal is upheld.

3. Development Application No. N0429/16 for the demolition of existing dwellings and structures and construction of an eight (8) storey residential flat building comprising three (3) basement parking levels, and sixty-two (62) residential apartments with temporary access to Leicester Avenue, and sixty-three (63) residential apartments with permanent access to Hilts Road, over Lot 8 in the DP 4072 and Lot 1 in DP 136337, No. 38 Leicester Avenue, Lot 1 in DP 965698, No. 40 Leicester Avenue, and Lot 5 in DP 667462, No. 42 Leicester Avenue, Strathfield is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure ‘A’ to this agreement.

4. In relation to the amendment for which leave is granted by order 2(a) above, the Applicant shall pay the Respondent’s costs in the sum of $5,000 (plus GST) pursuant to s 97B of the Environmental Plannign and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW).

……………………….

Jenny Smithson

Commissioner of the Court

Annexure A (318 KB, pdf)

Annexure B (1.59 MB, pdf)

Amendments

07 June 2018 - Pursuant to rule 36.17 of the UCPR, the slip rule, by consent of the Parties, I amend Annexure A, being the Conditions of Consent of to the orders of 26 February 2018, at the introduction, Condition 1 and Condition 115, and revise the title of approved plan DA2.11D as revision 13, shown at a new Annexure B. These amendments confirm that the consent and approved plans do not authorise the carrying out of any development on 36 Leicester Avenue Strathfield.

Decision last updated: 07 June 2018