Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
- Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Orion Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1435 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 3 August and 3, 7, 8 and 21 September 2016 Date of orders: 21 September 2016 Decision date: 21 September 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Hussey AC Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: Torrens Title Subdivision for 104 lots, road layout, lot layout, impact on adjoining property, conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: ORION CONSULTING ENGINEERS PTY LTD (Applicant)
BLACKTOWN CITY COUNCIL (Respondent)Representation: Mr D Baird, Baird Lawyers (Applicant)
Mr D Leother, Bartier Perry (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2016/158931 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, 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 appeal is upheld.
The Applicant is granted leave to amend Development Application No. 16-02734 and to rely upon the amended plans listed in conditions 2.1.1 and 2.1.2, copies of which are behind Annexure "A".
Development Application No. 16-02734 (as amended) for the proposed Torrens title subdivision of 8 lots into 145 residential and 10 residue lots, associated earthworks, associated subdivision works, construction of new roads, demolition of existing structures, tree removal and site remediation on Lots 2, 3 & 4 in DP1459, Lots 1 & 2 in DP777321, Lots 1 & 2 in DP839188, Lot 1 in DP 135805 and Lots 5, 8, 9 & 10 in DP788571 known as 181-213 Garfield Road East, Riverstone, is approved subject to the conditions contained at Annexure “B”
…………….
Acting Commissioner Hussey
158931.16 Hussey (C) Annexure A (8.25 MB, pdf)
158931.16 Hussey (C) Annexure B (419 KB, pdf)
Amendments
28 September 2016 - Amendment to representation
- AGLC
- Orion Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1435
- Case
- [2016] NSWLEC 1435
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues addressed by the court were whether the Council was entitled to recover costs from Orion Consulting Engineers for the rectification of the defective work, and if so, the extent of those costs. The court had to determine whether the defective work fell under the definition of "defective work" in the Building Act 1993 (NSW), and whether the Council's actions in rectifying the defects and recovering costs were in accordance with the statutory provisions.
The court found that the work carried out by Orion Consulting Engineers was indeed defective, as it failed to meet the necessary standards and specifications outlined in the contract. The court held that the Council was entitled to recover costs for the rectification of the defective work, as per the statutory provisions. The court also considered the principles of quantum meruit, which allow for the recovery of a fair and reasonable remuneration for work done, and determined that the costs claimed by the Council were reasonable and justified.
Ultimately, the court ruled in favour of the Council, awarding them costs for the rectification of the defective work. The court determined that the Council's actions in rectifying the defects and recovering costs were in accordance with the statutory provisions, and that the costs claimed were reasonable and justified. The court ordered Orion Consulting Engineers to pay the Council the sum of $400,000, representing the costs incurred for the rectification of the defective work.
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.