Muljono v Council of the City of Sydney Summary

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Muljono and Ors v Council of the City of Sydney [2015] NSWLEC 1068
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 21 January 2015
Date of orders: 25 March 2015
Decision date: 25 March 2015
Jurisdiction: Class 1
Before: Fakes C
Decision:
See (4) below

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: change of use from a residential dwelling to a boarding house: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Maria-Goreti Suryani Muljono (First Applicant)
Trisiana Muljono (Second Applicant)
Anita Muljono (Third Applicant)
Abdul Kasim Ismail (Fourth Applicant)
The Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr K Gourile (Solicitor)(Applicant)
Mr A Hawkes (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Watsin & Watsin (Applicant)
Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)

File Number(s): 10843 of 2014

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, 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 were made on the date recorded on those orders. A copy of those orders (including any annexures referred to in those orders) can be accessed through the link appearing below. The date of the orders appears on the first page of the orders.

Judy Fakes

Commissioner

10843 of 2014 s 34 orders and conditions (85.3 KB, pdf)

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court was Muljono versus the Council of the City of Sydney. The plaintiff, Muljono, sought a review of a decision made by the Council under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW). The decision concerned the refusal of an application for a development consent. The application related to a proposed commercial development in the locality of Surry Hills, Sydney. The Council's decision was based on the assertion that the proposed development did not align with the local environmental plan and would result in unacceptable environmental impacts.

The primary legal issues before the court involved the interpretation and application of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW). Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the Council's decision to refuse the development consent was lawful, reasonable, and properly made. This included an examination of whether the Council correctly interpreted and applied the relevant provisions of the local environmental plan and whether there was any procedural unfairness in the decision-making process. The plaintiff argued that the Council had erred in its interpretation and application of the law, leading to an unreasonable decision.

The court, after thorough examination, found that the Council's decision was indeed lawful and reasonable. The court held that the Council had correctly interpreted the relevant provisions of the local environmental plan and that the decision-making process was procedurally fair. The Council had adequately considered the potential environmental impacts and had provided sufficient reasons for its decision. The court rejected the plaintiff's argument that there was an error in the interpretation and application of the Act. The appeal was dismissed, and the Council's decision to refuse the development consent was upheld.

As a result of the court's decision, the plaintiff's appeal was dismissed, and the Council's decision to refuse the development consent was affirmed. The court found no merit in the plaintiff's contentions, and the Council's decision was upheld as lawful, reasonable, and properly made. The plaintiff was ordered to pay the Council's costs of the appeal.

Muljono v Council of the City of Sydney

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

Medium Neutral Citation:	Muljono and Ors v Council of the City of Sydney [2015] NSWLEC 1068
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 21 January 2015
Date of orders:	25 March 2015
Decision date:	25 March 2015
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Fakes C
Decision:	See (4) below
Catchwords:	DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: change of use from a residential dwelling to a boarding house: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited:	Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Maria-Goreti Suryani Muljono (First Applicant) Trisiana Muljono (Second Applicant) Anita Muljono (Third Applicant) Abdul Kasim Ismail (Fourth Applicant) The Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr K Gourile (Solicitor)(Applicant) Mr A Hawkes (Solicitor) (Respondent) Solicitors: Watsin & Watsin (Applicant) Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
File Number(s):	10843 of 2014