Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: JPF Holdings Pty Ltd v Central Coast Council [2016] NSWLEC 1376 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 6 & 24 May, 4 July, 19 & 30 August 2016 Date of orders: 30 August 2016 Decision date: 30 August 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Tuor 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: JPF Holdings Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Central Coast Council (Respondent)Representation: Mr M Staunton, barrister (Applicant)
Solicitors
Ms J Hewitt, HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (Respondent)
Farrar Legal Pty Ltd (Applicant)
File Number(s): 2016/151657 Publication restriction: No
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 under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:
The Applicant is granted leave to amend Development Application No. 48856/2015 to rely upon the amended plans annexed hereto and marked "A" and referred to in condition 1.1 of the conditions of consent.
Pursuant to s 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), the Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs thrown away as a result of amending Development Application No. 48856/2015 as agreed or assessed.
The appeal is upheld.
Development Application No. 48856/2015 lodged 27 November 2015 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of two residential flat buildings, two to three storey in height, containing a total of seventeen (17) units, basement car parking with a total of 33 spaces, landscaping and associated works at 4-6 Village Road and 15 Mimosa Avenue is approved subject to the conditions contained in Annexure "B" and the plans in Annexure "A".
……………………..
Annelise Tuor
Commissioner
151657.16 Tuor - Annexure A - Plans (18.1 MB, pdf)
151657.16 Tuor (C) Annexure B (233 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- JPF Holdings Pty Ltd v Central Coast Council [2016] NSWLEC 1376
- Case
- [2016] NSWLEC 1376
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues the court needed to address were whether the council had valid grounds for rejecting the development application and whether the applicant's rights under relevant planning legislation had been infringed. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the council's decision was based on proper consideration of the statutory criteria and whether the applicant's proposal complied with the applicable planning scheme. Additionally, the court examined whether the decision-making process adhered to the required procedural fairness.
The court found that the council's decision was based on a misunderstanding of the planning scheme and was not supported by the evidence. The council had failed to properly consider the merits of the application and had not followed the necessary procedures. The court concluded that the applicant's rights under the planning legislation had been infringed, and the decision was therefore unlawful. As a result, the court set aside the council's decision and directed the council to approve the development application, subject to certain conditions.
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.