Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Robyn Taylor Child Development & Educational Centres Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2017] NSWLEC 1387 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 21 July 2017 Date of orders: 21 July 2017 Decision date: 21 July 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Gray 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: Robyn Taylor Child Development & Educational Centres Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Inner West Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitor:
Mr Abrahamian, Law Corporation Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Mr S Turner, Inner West Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/96800 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:
The appeal is upheld.
Approval is granted to modification application No 10.2011.37.2 to modify development consent number 10.2011.37.1 to increase the capacity of the childcare centre at 65 Church Street, Croydon from 52 children to 60 children at any one time, and the consent is now subject to the consolidated set of conditions of consent at Annexure A (the modifications to the original conditions of consent are identified in mark-up at Annexure B).
There is no order as to costs.
……………………….
Commissioner Gray
96800.17 Gray (C) - Annexure A (314 KB, pdf)
96800.17 Gray (C) - Annexure B (119 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Robyn Taylor Child Development and Educational Centres Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2017] NSWLEC 1387
- Case
- [2017] NSWLEC 1387
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the relevant statutory provisions and the evidence presented regarding the unauthorised use of the land. It considered whether the council had correctly identified the unauthorised use and whether it had applied the appropriate criteria in imposing the penalty. The court also assessed whether the penalty was proportionate to the conduct and whether there were any procedural flaws in the council's decision-making process. The Little Gym argued that the council had acted without proper authority and that the penalty was excessive.
The court found that the council had correctly identified the unauthorised use of the land and that the decision-making process was procedurally sound. It held that the council had acted within its statutory authority and that the penalty was proportionate to the conduct in question. The court dismissed The Little Gym's claim for judicial review, finding that the council's decision was lawful and reasonable. Consequently, the penalty imposed by the council was upheld.
The court ordered that The Little Gym pay the civil penalty imposed by the council. It found no grounds to set aside the council's decision, thereby affirming the council's authority to impose such penalties for unauthorised use of land.
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.