Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Merrin Developments Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council [2017] NSWLEC 1075 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 16 January & 13 February 2017 Date of orders: 22 February 2017 Decision date: 22 February 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Smithson 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: Merrin Developments Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Northern Beaches Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Ms J. Reid (Applicant)
Solicitors:
Mr C McFadzean, Swaab Lawyers (Applicant)
Ms D Townsend, King Wood & Mallesons (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2016/341084 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:
Leave is granted to the Applicant to rely on the following amended plans:
Drawing Number
Title
Author
Date
Sheet No. DD01, Issue P11
Ground Floor and Basement Plans
Platinum Design Architects
20 January 2017
Sheet No. DD01A, Issue P4
Apartment Building Basement Plan
Sheet No. DD02, Issue P7
First Floor and Section Floor Plans
Sheet No. DD03, Issue P7
Streetscape Elevations 1 and Schedule of External Finishes
Sheet No. DD04, Issue P7
Streetscape Elevations 2 and Schedule of External Finishes
Sheet No. DD06, Issue P4
Roof Plan
Sheet No. DD07, Issue P1
Thermal Specification
INT02-DA-100
Coversheet, Imagery & Plant Schedule
Sym Studio
January 2017
INT02-S34-101, Issue A
Landscape Plan (RFB)
27 January 2017
INT02-S34-901, Issue A
Landscape Sections
27 January 2017
The appeal is upheld.
Development application No. N0389/16 for Construction of a residential flat building related to subdivision DA N-350-14 at 53, 53A and 53B Warriewood Road, Warriewood, is approved in accordance with the conditions, including deferred commencement conditions, set out in Annexure A.
……………………….
Commissioner Smithson
341084.16 Smithson (C) (203 KB, pdf)
341084.16 Smithson - Plans (17.5 MB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Merrin Developments Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council [2017] NSWLEC 1075
- Case
- [2017] NSWLEC 1075
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the council had correctly applied the relevant legislative provisions in denying the development application. Specifically, the court had to determine if the council's decision was lawful, reasonable, and whether it had appropriately considered all relevant factors as required by the Act. The appellant argued that the council had failed to adequately consider the merits of the application and had instead relied on irrelevant or improper considerations.
In its reasoning, the court found that the council had indeed erred in its decision-making process. It was determined that the council had not fully considered the merits of the development application and had instead placed undue emphasis on certain environmental concerns. The court held that the council's failure to appropriately weigh all relevant factors amounted to an error of law, thereby rendering its decision unlawful. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the council's decision to refuse the development application was quashed.
The court ordered that the matter be remitted to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the proper legal principles and taking into account all relevant considerations. The council was directed to reassess the development application in a manner consistent with the findings of the court. This included ensuring that all relevant factors were appropriately weighed and considered in the decision-making process.
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.