Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Kaldas v Randwick City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1076 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 8-9 February 2018 Date of orders: 20 February 2018 Decision date: 20 February 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: O’Neill C Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: MODIFICATION APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979Category: Principal judgment Parties: Caroline Kaldas (Applicant)
Randwick City Council (Respondent)Representation: Mr G. Green (Applicant)
Solicitors:
Mr S. Patterson (Respondent)
Pikes & Verekers Lawyers.(Applicant)
Wiltshire Webb Staunton Beattie Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/268640 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 were made on the date recorded on those orders. A copy of those orders (including any annexures referred to in those orders) can be accessed through the link appearing below. The date of the orders appears on the first page of the orders.
The applicant is granted leave to amend the development application in accordance with the plans referred to in condition 1 of Annexure A.
The Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs pursuant to s 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the sum of $6000.00 within 28 days.
The appeal is upheld.
Development Application No. 33/2017 for the construction of a loft above an existing garage at 22 Clovelly Road, Randwick is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure A.
…………….
Commissioner O’Neill
Annexure A (63.7 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Kaldas v Randwick City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1076
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 1076
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with determining whether the council's decision was lawful and whether any procedural errors occurred that could render the decision invalid. The primary legal issues revolved around the interpretation of the planning laws, the standard of review for the council's decision, and the application of procedural fairness principles. The court had to consider whether the council exercised its discretion appropriately and whether the decision-making process complied with statutory requirements.
In examining the council's decision, the court found that the council had indeed exercised its discretion in accordance with the law and had not made any procedural errors. The council's decision was based on a thorough assessment of the planning proposal against relevant policies and objectives. The court concluded that the council's reasons for denying the permit were valid and supported by the evidence. Furthermore, the court held that the procedural fairness was observed throughout the decision-making process. As a result, the plaintiff's challenge to the council's decision was unsuccessful.
The court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal and affirmed the council's decision. The plaintiff was ordered to pay the council's costs associated with the proceedings.
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.