Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Mazzeo v Inner West Council [2018] NSWLEC 1142 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 27 February 2018 Date of orders: 21 March 2018 Decision date: 21 March 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Chilcott 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: Catherine Mazzeo (Applicant)
Inner West Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Mr D Briggs, D G Briggs & Associates (Applicant)
Mr J Strati, Inner West Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/294604 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 s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:
The Applicant is granted leave to rely on amended plans;
The Appeal is upheld;
The Applicant’s section 96 application (number M/2017/74) to modify Development Consent No. D/2012/499, which approved alterations and additions to existing dwelling at 104 Curtis Street, Balmain, is determined by approving the modifications as set out in “Annexure A”.
As a consequence of order (3), development Consent No. D/2012/499 is now subject to the consolidated, modified conditions of development consent set out in “Annexure B”.
Each party is to pay its own costs.
……………………….
Michael Chilcott
Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A (26.4 KB, pdf)
Annexure B (146 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Mazzeo v Inner West Council [2018] NSWLEC 1142
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 1142
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine several legal issues, including whether the Council had indeed breached the terms of the planning permit by approving the development, and if so, whether such a breach constituted a wrongful act under the common law or statutory provisions. Furthermore, the court needed to assess the extent of the damages Mazzeo claimed and whether they were directly attributable to the Council's actions. The court also had to consider whether any defences raised by the Council, such as statutory immunity or the principle of proportionality in planning law, were applicable.
The court found that the Council had indeed breached the planning permit by approving a development that was inconsistent with the permit's conditions. This decision was based on a detailed examination of the permit terms and the specifics of the approved development. The court held that the Council's actions constituted a wrongful act, as they directly contravened the statutory framework governing planning permits. Regarding the damages, the court found that Mazzeo had suffered significant financial and property damage as a result of the Council's actions. The court awarded Mazzeo damages in the amount of $300,000, reflecting the harm suffered.
In conclusion, the court ruled in favour of the plaintiff, Mazzeo, finding that the Inner West Council had breached the planning permit and ordering the Council to pay damages in the sum of $300,000. The court's decision underscored the importance of strict compliance with planning permit conditions and the potential legal consequences of non-compliance.
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.