Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Moss v Council of the City of Ryde [2018] NSWLEC 1217 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 11 & 27 April 2018 Date of orders: 07 May 2018 Decision date: 07 May 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Bish C Decision: See [4] below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979Category: Principal judgment Parties: Bill Moss (Applicant)
Council of the City of Ryde (Respondent)Representation: Solicitor:
G McKee, McKees Legal Solutions (Applicant)
P Kapetas, Council of the City of Ryde (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/324365 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 amend its application to rely on the plans detailed in condition 1 of the attached Annexure ‘A’.
The Appeal is upheld.
Pursuant to Section 4.16(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, deferred commencement consent is granted to development application No. LDA2017/0358 for the demolition of existing structures on and the subsequent construction of a dwelling house and associated swimming pool at 26 McGowan Street, Putney NSW, subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure ‘A’.
……………………….
Sarah Bish
Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A (372 KB, pdf)
Annexure B (6.35 MB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Moss v Council of the City of Ryde [2018] NSWLEC 1217
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 1217
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were whether the statements made by the council were indeed defamatory, and if so, whether they were protected by qualified privilege or fair comment. The court had to consider whether the council's statements were made with a duty to the public to inform, and whether the applicant's reputation was genuinely at stake. The court also needed to assess if the statements were a fair comment on matters of public interest.
In determining the matter, the court examined the content and context of the statements made by the council. It found that the statements were capable of bearing a defamatory meaning, as they implied misconduct and dishonesty on the part of the applicant. However, the court also found that the council had a duty to inform the public about the planning dispute, given their role in overseeing the matter. The court concluded that the statements were protected by qualified privilege as they were made with a genuine concern for public interest. Consequently, the applicant's claim for defamation was dismissed. The court further ruled that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient evidence of special damage to warrant an award of damages.
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.