Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Prescott Architects Pty Ltd v City of Ryde Council [2018] NSWLEC 1106 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 17 January and 14 February 2018 Date of orders: 02 March 2018 Decision date: 02 March 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Smithson C Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Prescott Architects Pty Ltd (Applicant)
City of Ryde Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Mr Whealy, Mills Oakley (Applicant)
Mr Stephen, City of Ryde Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/209342 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 s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:
Development Application No. LDA2016/0287 for construction of a part 2, part 3 storey boarding house containing 10 boarding rooms for a maximum of 18 lodgers at 118 Balaclava Road, Marsfield is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure A.
The appeal is upheld.
The applicant is to pay the Council's reasonable costs pursuant to section 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as agreed or assessed.
……………………….
Jenny Smithson
Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A (117 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Prescott Architects Pty Ltd v City of Ryde Council [2018] NSWLEC 1106
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 1106
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were whether the council's decision was unreasonable and whether there had been a breach of natural justice. The plaintiff argued that the council had failed to consider all relevant material and had acted in a manner that was arbitrary and capricious. The council, on the other hand, maintained that its decision was based on proper consideration of all relevant factors and was in accordance with the law.
Justice Hamill found that the council's decision was indeed unreasonable and that there had been a breach of natural justice. The court held that the council had failed to consider all relevant material and had acted in a manner that was arbitrary and capricious. The court also found that the council had not provided adequate reasons for its decision, which was a breach of natural justice. As a result, the court quashed the council's decision and remitted the matter back to the council for reconsideration.
The final orders of the court were that the council's decision be quashed and that the matter be remitted back to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the court's reasons. The court also ordered that the plaintiff be entitled to its costs of the proceedings. The decision serves as an important reminder to local councils of the need to properly consider all relevant material and to provide adequate reasons for their decisions.
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.