Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Lay v Randwick City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1333 Hearing dates: Hearing 18-19 June 2018, adjourned to Conciliation Conference on 19, 26 June 2018. Date of orders: 03 July 2018 Decision date: 03 July 2018 Before: Walsh 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: Graeme Lay (Applicant)
Randwick City Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
I Hemmings SC (Applicant)
Mills Oakley Lawyer (Applicant)
S Patterson, Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/277957 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 make, 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 s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:
The Applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended plans and documents as referred to in condition 1 of the conditions of consent contained at Annexure “A”.
The appeal is upheld.
Modification application no. DA/839/2015/A seeking to modify development consent no. DA 839/2015 at 163 Arden Street, Coogee, is approved subject to the conditions contained at Annexure “A”.
Exhibits from adjourned hearing are returned.
……………………….
Peter Walsh
Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A (216 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Lay v Randwick City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1333
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 1333
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the council's decision to refuse the development permit was legally sound. The court needed to determine if the council followed the correct legal process, applied the appropriate criteria, and exercised its discretion reasonably. Additionally, Lay argued that the council had failed to consider relevant environmental and planning factors in its decision-making process. The court was tasked with examining the council's reasons for refusal and whether they were supported by evidence and relevant planning legislation.
The court examined the council's decision-making process and found that the council had not followed the correct procedures. The court held that the council had failed to adequately consider certain environmental factors and had not applied the appropriate criteria in reaching its decision. The court also found that the council's reasons for refusal were not adequately supported by evidence. Consequently, the court concluded that the council's decision was unreasonable and that Lay's application for a development permit should be granted. The court ordered the council to approve Lay's development permit 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.