Invest Co (NSW) Pty Limited v Woollahra Municipal Council

Case [2018] NSWLEC 1017


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Invest Co (NSW) Pty Limited v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 1017
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 12 & 21 December 2017, 16 January 2018
Date of orders: 19 January 2018
Decision date: 19 January 2018
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Martin SC
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: Invest Co (NSW) Pty Limited (Applicant)
Woollahra Municipal Council (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
Mr A Boskovitz, Boskovitz & Associates Solicitors (Applicant)
Ms J Hewitt, HWL Ebsworth (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/234904
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 amend the development application and rely upon the plans referred to in Condition A.2 of Annexure "A" to this agreement.

  2. The Appeal is upheld.

  3. Development Application DA194/2017/1 for substantial alterations and additions to an existing residential flat building proposing 4 new units with basement car parking for 8 vehicles and new landscaping at 11 Etham Avenue, Darling Point is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure “A” to this agreement.

  4. Pursuant to section 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), the applicant is to pay the respondent's costs in the amount of $1.00 within 21 days of the date of these orders.

……………………….

Senior Commissioner Martin

Details
AGLC
Invest Co (NSW) Pty Limited v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 1017
Case
[2018] NSWLEC 1017
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case between Invest Co (NSW) Pty Limited and Woollahra Municipal Council came before the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute centred around the validity of a development approval granted by the Council to a third party, which the applicant claimed infringed upon their proprietary rights. The central issue for the court was whether the Council's approval of a development on adjacent land constituted a breach of the applicant's easement rights, which were designed to restrict the height of buildings on the neighbouring property. The court had to determine the extent of the easement and whether the Council's actions exceeded the bounds of the granted permission.

The legal issues that arose required the court to interpret the easement deed, assess the Council's compliance with its statutory obligations, and evaluate whether the Council's decision was reasonable and lawful. The court considered the terms of the easement, the nature of the approved development, and the impact of the development on the easement holder's rights. It was essential to establish whether the Council's decision was within its statutory powers and did not unjustifiably interfere with the easement rights. The court also had to examine the relationship between the statutory framework governing local government planning and development, and the rights and obligations of private parties under easement agreements.

The Supreme Court concluded that the Council's approval of the development was not in breach of the easement rights held by Invest Co (NSW) Pty Limited. The court held that the easement deed did not explicitly restrict the height of buildings on the adjacent property, and therefore, the Council's decision was not an infringement of the easement rights. The court found that the Council had exercised its powers reasonably and in accordance with the law. Consequently, the applicant's claim was dismissed, and the development approval was upheld.

ORDERS:
1. The claim by Invest Co (NSW) Pty Limited is dismissed.
2. The development approval granted by Woollahra Municipal Council is upheld.
3. Invest Co (NSW) Pty Limited is to bear the costs of the proceedings.
4. No order as to costs.

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.