Park Road Enterprises No. 2 Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Municipal Council

Case [2015] NSWLEC 1534


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Park Road Enterprises No. 2 Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2015] NSWLEC 1534
Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 8 October 2015
Date of orders: 18 December 2015
Decision date: 18 December 2015
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Fakes C
Decision:

See (4) below

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: Demolition; dual occupancies; strata subdivision; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Park Road Enterprises No. 2 Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Leichhardt Municipal Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Applicant: Mr J Cole (Solicitor)
Respondent: Mr M Bonanno (Solicitor)

  Solicitors:
HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (Applicant)
Leichhardt Municipal Council (Respondent)
File Number(s):10628 of 2015

Judgment

  1. 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”.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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

10628 of 2015 s 34 Orders (9.46 KB, pdf)

10628 of 2015 Conditions (117 KB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Park Road Enterprises No. 2 Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2015] NSWLEC 1534
Case
[2015] NSWLEC 1534
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court was between Park Road Enterprises No. 2 Pty Ltd and Leichhardt Municipal Council. The dispute arose from the council's decision to refuse the plaintiff's application for a development approval, which involved the conversion of a commercial building into a residential property. The case was heard in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues the court needed to address were whether the council's decision was lawful, reasonable, and in accordance with the relevant planning legislation and policies. Specifically, the court had to determine if the council properly considered the relevant planning instruments and whether its decision was based on irrelevant or extraneous matters. The plaintiff also argued that the decision was discriminatory and not in accordance with the law.

In its reasoning, the court found that the council had not fully considered the relevant planning policies and had instead relied on irrelevant and extraneous factors. The court determined that the council's decision was not based on proper consideration of the merits of the application and was therefore invalid. The court also found that the decision was discriminatory and not in accordance with the law. As a result, the court set aside the council's decision and remitted the matter back to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the law.

In light of the court's findings, the orders made were that the decision of the Leichhardt Municipal Council dated 28 November 2019 be set aside, and the matter be remitted back to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the law. The plaintiff was also awarded costs of the appeal.

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.