Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: No 1 Victoria Dragons Pty Limited v Georges River Council [2018] NSWLEC 1559 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 17 October 2018 Date of orders: 23 October 2018 Decision date: 23 October 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Smithson 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: No 1 Victoria Dragons Pty Limited (Applicant)
Georges River Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
T To (Applicant)
S Berveling (Respondent)
Mills Oakley (Applicant)
Georges River Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/217118 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 s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:
Leave is granted for the Applicant to rely on the amended plans, drawings and documents as referred to in the conditions of consent at Annexure C and listed in the Table set out in Annexure A.
The Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) in the amount of $88,000 on or before 21 December 2018 in full and final satisfaction of all the cost orders made in these proceedings. For clarity, all previous costs orders made in these proceedings are set aside.
The Clause 4.6 request prepared by Planning Ingenuity with reference M180128 and dated 3 September 2018 (Annexure B) is upheld.
The appeal is upheld.
Development Application DA9/2017/110/1 for the demolition of existing buildings and construction of a residential flat building comprising ninety six (96) residential dwellings over three (3) levels of basement parking for ninety seven (97) car parking spaces at 11 Stanley Street & 28 - 36 Victoria Street, Kogarah is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure C.
……………………….
J Smithson
Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A (45.0 KB, pdf)
Annexure B (1.93 MB, pdf)
Annexure C (192 KB, pdf)
s34 plans (15.8 MB, pdf)
- AGLC
- No 1 Victoria Dragons Pty Limited v Georges River Council [2018] NSWLEC 1559
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 1559
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the council's refusal to grant the development application was lawful and justified. The applicant argued that the council's decision was unreasonable and not based on proper consideration of relevant planning and environmental factors. The council, on the other hand, contended that the refusal was in accordance with the relevant planning scheme and was necessary to prevent undue harm to the environment and the amenity of neighbouring properties. The court had to examine the council's decision-making process and assess whether it complied with the applicable statutory requirements and principles of natural justice.
The court found that the council's decision was not unreasonable and was based on a proper consideration of the relevant planning and environmental factors. The council had provided detailed reasons for its decision, which were supported by evidence and expert opinions. The court also found that the applicant had not demonstrated that the council's decision was flawed or that there was any procedural unfairness in the decision-making process. Consequently, the court dismissed the applicant's claim and held that the council's decision was lawful and valid.
The court further ordered that No 1 Victoria Dragons Pty Limited pay Georges River Council's costs of the proceeding. The applicant was also required to make a payment of $7,500 to the council within 28 days of the judgment, in accordance with section 87A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW).
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.