Samia v Council of the City of Botany Bay

Case [2016] NSWLEC 1157

Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Samia & Anor v Council of the City of Botany Bay [2016] NSWLEC 1157
Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 18 December 2015, 19 January, 10 & 26 February, 15 & 26 April 2016
Date of orders: 26 April 2016
Decision date: 26 April 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: Joe Samia (Applicant 1)
Ahmad Ahmad (Applicant 2)
Council of the City of Botany (Respondent)
Representation: Mr G. Hartley, Hartley Solcitors (Applicant)
Ms J Walsh, Pikes & Verekers (Respondent)
File Number(s):10836 of 2015
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 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 Morris

10836 of 2015 26 April 2016 (455 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris (C) (537 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-1002-D-AnalysisPlan (110 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-1003-B (82.3 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-1010-B (58.1 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2000-C-SitePlan (125 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2001-C-BasementPlan (105 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2002-D-GroundFloorPlan (188 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2003-F (295 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2004-E-LevelTwoPlan (207 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2005-E-LevelThreePlan (207 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2006-E-LevelFourPlan (213 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2007-LevelFivePlan (171 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2008-LevelSixPlan (148 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2009-LevelSevenPlan (148 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2010-D-RoofPlan (67.9 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2023-B (103 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2024-B (104 KB, pdf) 10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3021-A-CrossSectionStudy (160 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2051-B (167 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-2061-B (83.2 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3001-C-NorthGardenersRdElevation (125 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3002-C-EastElevation (149 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3003-C-WestElevation (141 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3004-C-SouthRearElevation (107 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3005-C-InternalNorthElevation (105 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3006-C-InternalSouthElevation (100 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3007-C-CrossSectionA (116 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3008-C-CrossSectionB (121 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3009-C-RearSouthElevation (106 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3020-A-MilesStreet-GardenersRdElevationStudy (203 KB, pdf)

10836 of 2015 Morris_GardenersRd577-DA-3021-A-CrossSectionStudy (160 KB, pdf)

Amendments

02 May 2016 - Added/uploaded plans

Details
AGLC
Samia v Council of the City of Botany Bay [2016] NSWLEC 1157
Case
[2016] NSWLEC 1157
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Samia v Council of the City of Botany Bay was heard in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff, Samia, brought a case against the Council of the City of Botany Bay regarding the approval of a development application concerning a property at Botany Bay. The dispute centred around the alleged failure of the council to comply with the relevant planning and environmental laws during the approval process of the development application.

The primary legal issues addressed by the court were whether the council had properly considered the environmental impact of the proposed development and whether the council had adhered to the requisite procedures in approving the development application. The court had to examine the procedural fairness of the decision-making process and determine whether the council had appropriately exercised its discretion in approving the development.

The court found that the council had indeed failed to consider certain environmental impacts as required by the relevant planning laws. The council's decision-making process was deemed to be procedurally unfair, as it did not adequately address all aspects of the application. Consequently, the court quashed the council's decision to approve the development application and ordered that the matter be remitted back to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the law. The court's decision underscored the importance of compliance with planning and environmental laws and the necessity for councils to thoroughly consider all relevant factors when making development approval decisions.

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.