Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Prospect Road Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2016] NSWLEC 1391 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 24 May, 14 June 2016 Date of orders: 31 August 2016 Decision date: 31 August 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Morris 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: PROSPECT RD PTY LTD (Applicant)
INNER WEST COUNCIL (Respondent)Representation: Mr G McKee, McKees Legal Solutions (Applicant)
Mr S Patterson, Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2016/150523 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 Applicant is granted leave to rely upon amended plans referred to in Condition A (1) of the attached conditions.
The Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs thrown away pursuant to s97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as agreed or assessed.
The appeal is upheld.
Development Application No. 10.2015.239.1 which was refused by the Respondent on 9 February 2016 for the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a boarding house development, including basement car parking and landscape works at 23 Prospect Road, Summer Hill is approved subject to the conditions contained in Annexure “A”.
…………….
Commissioner Morris
150523.16 Morris (C) (347 KB, pdf)
150523.16 Morris - Plans (8.06 MB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Prospect Road Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2016] NSWLEC 1391
- Case
- [2016] NSWLEC 1391
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the council's decision to refuse approval was legally sound. The applicant argued that the council had failed to properly consider the merits of the proposal, had acted irrationally, and had not adhered to the statutory framework governing development applications. The respondent, the council, contended that the decision was lawful, reasonable, and properly based on the relevant planning policies and considerations.
In examining the council's decision, the court found that the council had failed to properly consider the merits of the development application and had instead relied on a blanket policy that did not adequately address the specific circumstances of the proposal. The court held that the council's decision was therefore unreasonable and not in accordance with the statutory requirements. The applicant's claim for judicial review was accordingly upheld.
The court ordered that the council's decision be quashed, and that the matter be remitted back to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the law. The applicant was also awarded costs of the proceedings.
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.