Roberts v Palerang Council

[2016] NSWLEC 1225

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Roberts & Anor v Palerang Council [2016] NSWLEC 1225
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 17 March 2016
Date of orders:	02 June 2016
Decision date:	02 June 2016
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	O’Neill 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:	Michael & Rosemary Roberts (Applicant) Palerang Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: Ms L. Saw barrister (Applicant) Mr A. Bradbury solicitor (Respondent) Solicitors: • (Applicant) Bradley Allen Love Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2016/160816
Publication restriction:	No

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 under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:

1. The appeal is upheld.

2. Application No 2015.026, to modify development consent No 2014.181 for a three lot subdivision, is determined by granting consent subject to the modifications described in annexure A.

3. As a consequence of Order 2. Development Consent 2014.181 is now subject to the consolidated, modified conditions set out in Annexure B.

…………….

Commissioner O’Neill

160816.16 O'Neill_Annexure A (212 KB, pdf)

160816.16 O'Neill_Annexure B (332 KB, pdf)

Decision last updated: 08 June 2016