Robby Ingham Pty Ltd v Kiama Municipal Council

Case [2016] NSWLEC 1490


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Robby Ingham Pty Ltd v Kiama Municipal Council [2016] NSWLEC 1490
Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 21 April 2016, 18 May 2016, 28 June, 4 August, 1, 15 and 29 September 2016
Date of orders: 25 October 2016
Decision date: 25 October 2016
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Brown C
Decision:

See (5) below

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: construction of a residential dwelling; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Robby Ingham Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Kiama Municipal Council (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
Mr G Green, solicitor, Pikes & Verekers Lawyers (Applicant)
Ms S Nevin, solicitor, Sparke Helmore Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s):2016/00151976
Publication restriction:No

Judgment

  1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal of Development Application 10.2015.77.1 for the construction of a residential dwelling at 242 Fern Street Gerringong.

  2. 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”.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. The final orders to give effect to the parties’ agreement under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:

  1. The appeal is upheld;

  2. The Applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended plans and updated supplementary documentation listed in Condition 1 of Annexure “A”;

  3. The Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs pursuant to section 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as agreed or assessed.

  4. Development Application 10.2015.77.1 for a residential dwelling at 242 Fern Street, Gerringong (being Lot 202 DP1169384) is approved subject to the conditions contained at Annexure “A”.

…………….

G T Brown

Commissioner

151976.16 - Annexure A (61.8 KB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Robby Ingham Pty Ltd v Kiama Municipal Council [2016] NSWLEC 1490
Case
[2016] NSWLEC 1490
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Robby Ingham Pty Ltd, the appellant, appealed against the Kiama Municipal Council, the respondent, in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary dispute arose from the appellant's challenge to the respondent's decision to deny an application for development approval under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW). The appellant sought approval for a development that would include the construction of residential units on a piece of land, but the council refused the application on grounds that it would not align with the local environmental and planning policies.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the council's decision was lawful and whether it had adequately considered the statutory criteria and relevant policies. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the council's refusal to approve the development was unreasonable and whether the appellant's rights under the Act were unjustly infringed. The court also examined whether the council had properly exercised its discretion in accordance with the law.

The court found that the council's decision was based on a thorough consideration of the statutory criteria and relevant policies. The council had provided detailed reasons for its decision, which were consistent with the legislative requirements. The court held that the council's decision was not unreasonable and that the appellant's application for development approval was properly refused. The court also determined that the council had adequately exercised its discretion under the Act, taking into account all relevant factors. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the council's decision was upheld.

The Supreme Court of New South Wales dismissed the appeal and confirmed the decision of the Kiama Municipal Council. The court ordered that Robby Ingham Pty Ltd pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

See (5) 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.