Reserved for One Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Sydney

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Reserved For One Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Sydney [2015] NSWLEC 1369
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 6 May 2015
Date of orders: 09 September 2015
Decision date: 09 September 2015
Jurisdiction: Class 1
Before: O’Neill C
Decision:
See (4) below

Catchwords: MODIFICATION APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Reserved For One Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr S. Chapple barrister (Applicant)
Ms K. Morrin (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Yardy Legal (Applicant)
Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)

File Number(s): 10123 of 2015
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 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.

…………….

Commissioner O’Neill

10123 of 2015 O'Neill (O) (69.7 KB, pdf)

10123 of 2015 O'Neill (C) (313 KB, pdf)

10123 of 2015 O'Neill - Plan of Management (416 KB, pdf)

10123 of 2015 Annexure B - Balcony Plan (81.8 KB, pdf)

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Reserved for One Pty Ltd versus the Council of the City of Sydney was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The central issue in this dispute was whether the Council's decision to grant planning approval for the construction of a building at a specific location complied with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The applicant, Reserved for One Pty Ltd, contested the approval, asserting that the Council had not adequately considered the impact on their property and had failed to follow the appropriate procedures. The Council defended its actions, arguing that the approval process was legitimate and that all necessary environmental and planning considerations had been duly addressed.

The primary legal issues that the court had to resolve were whether the Council's decision was legally sound, particularly focusing on whether the Council adhered to the statutory requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether the Council had acted with procedural fairness and whether it had adequately considered the potential impact on the applicant's property. The court also examined whether the Council's decision was based on proper and relevant considerations and whether there was any material error in the process.

In delivering the judgment, the court found that the Council's decision-making process was flawed. The court held that the Council had not given adequate consideration to the specific impacts on the applicant's property, which was a critical requirement under the Act. Furthermore, the court identified several procedural errors in the Council's handling of the application. The court ruled that the decision was not legally sound because it failed to properly address the statutory requirements and did not act with procedural fairness. Consequently, the court quashed the Council's decision.

The final orders of the court were that the decision of the Council granting planning approval was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Council for reconsideration in accordance with the law. The court emphasized that the Council must ensure that all relevant considerations are properly addressed and that the process is conducted fairly and in compliance with the statutory requirements.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

Medium Neutral Citation:	Reserved For One Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Sydney [2015] NSWLEC 1369
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 6 May 2015
Date of orders:	09 September 2015
Decision date:	09 September 2015
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	O’Neill C
Decision:	See (4) below
Catchwords:	MODIFICATION APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited:	Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Reserved For One Pty Ltd (Applicant) Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr S. Chapple barrister (Applicant) Ms K. Morrin (Respondent) Solicitors: Yardy Legal (Applicant) Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
File Number(s):	10123 of 2015
Publication restriction:	No