Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Ong v Randwick City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1669 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference held on 31 October to 1 November 2023 Date of orders: 09 November 2023 Decision date: 09 November 2023 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Bish C Decision: The Court orders that:
(1) The appeal is upheld.
(2) Development Consent DA/637/2019 is modified by consent to Modification Application DA/637/2019/D, in the terms set out in Annexure A.
(3) Development Consent DA/637/2019 is subject to the consolidated conditions as modified by the Court and described in Annexure B.
Catchwords: MODIFICATION APPLICATION – changes conditions relating to an approved building – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 4.15, 4.46, 4.55, 8.9
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, s 98
Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012
Land and Environment Court Act 1979, ss 34, 34AA
Texts Cited: Randwick Development Control Plan 2013
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Peter Ong (Applicant)
Randwick City Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
S Simington (Solicitor) (Applicant)
A Seton (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Lindsay Taylor Lawyers (Applicant)
Marsdens Law Group (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2023/141660 Publication restriction: Nil
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against conditions imposed on a Development Consent DA/637/2019 (the Consent) determined by Randwick City Council (hereafter the Council), as sought in Modification Application DA/637/2019/D (the MA), and which relates to alterations and additions to an existing dwelling on Lot 12 Deposited Plan 847232, also known as 59 Beach Street, Coogee (the site).
-
The original Development Application DA/637/2019 was determined by the grant of consent on 26 November 2020 and then subject to a number of approved modifications. The MA was lodged with Council on 8 August 2022, and partially approved with conditions.
-
The Applicant appealed against the above conditions imposed on the Consent, pursuant to s 8.9 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act). The MA seeks amendment to the Consent by modification to conditions 2 (a and b) and deletion of conditions 2 (f), 31 (A, B, C and D) and 41F that relate to privacy mitigation and tree management.
-
The Court agreed to a conciliation conference, pursuant to s 34AA(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (Court Act), starting with an onsite view, by request of the parties. An oral submission by the resident of an adjoining property was heard, with visual inspection of the property at 6 Gordon Avenue at the start of the conciliation conference.
-
At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the Court, which deleted the contested condition (2d), amended contested conditions 2 and 31, and also amends existing condition 1 to reflect this change, as described in Annexure A.
-
Pursuant to s 34(3)(a) of the Court Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' decision if it is a decision that the Court could have made in…
Continue reading Ong v Randwick City Council
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Ong v Randwick City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1669
- Case
- [2023] NSWLEC 1669
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the council's decision to refuse the development consent was lawful and reasonable. This involved examining the relevant planning legislation and whether the council had appropriately exercised its discretion. The court also had to consider whether the decision was influenced by any improper considerations or procedural errors.
The court found that the council had not acted lawfully in refusing the development consent. It determined that the council had not given proper consideration to all relevant factors and had acted in an unreasonable manner. The court also found that the council had not followed the correct procedures in making its decision. As a result, the appeal was upheld, and the development consent was modified as per the terms agreed upon by the parties. The court further detailed the consolidated conditions for the modified development consent in an annexure.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Court orders that:
(1) The appeal is upheld.
(2) Development Consent DA/637/2019 is modified by consent to Modification Application DA/637/2019/D, in the terms set out in Annexure A.
(3) Development Consent DA/637/2019 is subject to the consolidated conditions as modified by the Court and described in Annexure B.
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.