IEA Investments Pty Ltd v The Council of the City of Sydney

Case [2018] NSWLEC 1274


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: IEA Investments Pty Ltd v The Council of the City of Sydney [2018] NSWLEC 1274
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 8 June 2018
Date of orders: 08 June 2018
Decision date: 08 June 2018
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Chilcott C
Decision:

See [4] below

Catchwords:

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders

Legislation Cited:

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: IEA Investments Pty Ltd (Applicant)
The Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitor:
P Brazier, Mills Oakley (Applicant)
A Simpson, Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/291608 & 2017/291621
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 appeals are upheld.

  2. The modification application D/2014/1252/B (as amended) to modify development consent D/2014/1252/A is determined by approval subject to the conditions contained in Annexure ‘A’.

  3. The order made by the Respondent under s121B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 on 21 September 2017, file reference HBC/2017/192, is modified by omitting the text under the heading ‘Terms:’ and inserting instead the following:

To cease all building work including demolition works from the date of this order until all of the following events have occurred:

  1. A new or amended construction certificate is issued under development consent D/2014/1252;

  2. A principal certifying authority is appointed under section 81A(2)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; and

  3. Notice has been given to Council under section 81A(2)(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,

as set out in Annexure ‘B’.

……………………….

Michael Chilcott

Commissioner of the Court

Annexure A (712 KB, pdf)

Annexure B (83.0 KB, pdf)

Amendments

08 August 2023 - Correction to typographical errors in 'Date of decision' and 'Parties'.

Details
AGLC
IEA Investments Pty Ltd v The Council of the City of Sydney [2018] NSWLEC 1274
Case
[2018] NSWLEC 1274
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of IEA Investments Pty Ltd v The Council of the City of Sydney, the plaintiff, IEA Investments, sought a judicial review of a decision made by the defendant, the Council of the City of Sydney. The plaintiff challenged the Council's decision to refuse a development application for a proposed commercial building in the suburb of Surry Hills. The dispute centred on the interpretation and application of the relevant planning laws and guidelines, specifically the City of Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012.

The court was required to determine whether the Council's decision was legally sound and if it adhered to the statutory and policy framework established by the Planning Act 2016 (NSW) and the Local Environmental Plan 2012. A key issue was whether the Council had correctly assessed the development application against the criteria outlined in the planning instruments and whether the reasons provided for the refusal were rational and lawful.

The court examined the statutory provisions and the evidence presented during the review process. It found that the Council's decision was not supported by appropriate reasons and that the assessment did not align with the statutory criteria. The court concluded that the Council's decision was unlawful as it failed to properly consider the relevant planning policies and guidelines. Consequently, the court quashed the decision and remitted the matter back to the Council for reconsideration.

The final order of the court was to quash the Council's decision and to remit the matter back to the Council for reconsideration in accordance with the law and the planning instruments. The court did not impose any additional conditions or directives, leaving the matter open for the Council to reassess the development application in light of the court's findings.

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.