Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
- Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Marcarian v Willoughby City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1137 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 12 February 2025 Date of orders: 11 March 2025 Decision date: 11 March 2025 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Thorpe AC Decision: The Court orders:
(1) The appeal is upheld.
(2) Modification Application DA-2021/18/B for the enclosure of a portion of the lower ground floor area to create a loggia, the addition of a lift, confirmation of the location of the southern garage wall, relocation of the plant room, deletion of condition 2F and amendment of condition 37 of DA-2021/18 at 75 Coolawin Road, Northbridge, is determined by way of approval.
(3) Development Consent No DA-2021/18/B is modified in the terms set out in Annexure A.
(4) Development Consent No DA-2021/18/B as modified by the Court is set out in Annexure B.
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPEAL – modification of development consent – residential development – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 4.15, 4.56, 8.9
Land and Environment Court Act 1979, ss 34, 34AA
Cases Cited: SDHA Pty Ltd v Waverley Council (2015) 209 LGERA 233; [2015] NSWLEC 65
Texts Cited: Willoughby City Council, Community Participation Plan, 2024
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Taleen Marcarian (Applicant)
Willoughby City Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
N Eastman SC (Applicant)
JP Merlino (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Mills Oakley (Applicant)
HWL Ebsworth (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2024/273282 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to the provisions of s 8.9 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) against the deemed refusal by Willoughby City Council (Council) to modify Development Consent No DA-2021/18 granted for the construction of a part two, part three storey dwelling house with a pool to the rear and associated works (approved development) at 75 Coolawin Road, Northbridge, legally described as Lot 7 in DP 18857 (site).
-
The proposed modification of the consent includes extension of the lower ground floor area to create a loggia, the addition of a lift, confirmation of the location of the southern garage wall, relocation of the plant room and deletion of condition 2F and amendment of condition 37. The approved development has previously been modified under DA-2021/18/A.
-
The Court arranged a conciliation conference between the parties under s 34AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (Court Act). I presided over the conciliation conference, which was held on 12 February 2025. The parties reached agreement at the conference as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties.
-
Under s 34(3) of the Court Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision if the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.56 of the EPA Act to modify the development…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Marcarian v Willoughby City Council and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2025] NSWLEC 1137
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to consider whether the respondent's decision to refuse development consent was lawful, reasonable, and justified. This involved examining whether the respondent had acted within their statutory powers and followed the correct legal procedures. Furthermore, the court had to determine whether the modifications proposed by the appellant were in compliance with the relevant planning instruments and policies, and whether the respondent's reasons for refusal were supported by substantial evidence.
The court found that the respondent's decision to refuse development consent was not supported by the evidence and was therefore unlawful. The court held that the modifications proposed by the appellant were consistent with the relevant planning instruments and policies, and that the respondent had not provided sufficient reasons for the refusal. The court also found that the respondent had failed to consider relevant evidence and had acted outside their statutory powers. Consequently, the appeal was upheld, and the court granted the modification application, ordering the respondent to approve the modifications as outlined in the decision.
The court's final orders included the approval of the appellant's modification application, the modification of the existing development consent, and the setting out of the modified development consent in an annexure. The respondent was directed to take all necessary steps to implement the court's orders and to provide the appellant with a copy of the modified development consent. The decision provides important guidance on the scope of a local council's powers in relation to development consent and the importance of proper consideration and evidence in decision-making processes.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Court orders:
(1) The appeal is upheld.
(2) Modification Application DA-2021/18/B for the enclosure of a portion of the lower ground floor area to create a loggia, the addition of a lift, confirmation of the location of the southern garage wall, relocation of the plant room, deletion of condition 2F and amendment of condition 37 of DA-2021/18 at 75 Coolawin Road, Northbridge, is determined by way of approval.
(3) Development Consent No DA-2021/18/B is modified in the terms set out in Annexure A.
(4) Development Consent No DA-2021/18/B as modified by the Court is set out in Annexure B.
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.