Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Statewide Planning Pty Ltd v Marrickville Council [2015] NSWLEC 1339 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 22, 24 April & 20, 27 May 2015 Date of orders: 27 May 2015 Decision date: 27 May 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dixon C Decision: Appeal upheld
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979Category: Principal judgment Parties: Statewide Planning Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Marrickville Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Mr Doyle (Applicant)
Mr J Strati (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Sydney Law Practice (Applicant)
Marrickville Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 10099 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 Dixon
10099 of 2015 Dixon (O) (89.7 KB, pdf)
10099 of 2015 Dixon (C) (285 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Statewide Planning Pty Ltd v Marrickville Council [2015] NSWLEC 1339
- Case
- [2015] NSWLEC 1339
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were whether the applicant's proposal complied with the relevant planning laws, and if the refusal of the permit was lawful. The court had to determine whether the development would be in accordance with the objectives of the local environmental plan and whether the proposal met the criteria for a development permit. The court also considered whether the refusal was unreasonable or unjust.
The Court of Appeal found that the proposal did comply with the planning laws, and the refusal of the permit was not justified. The court determined that the development would align with the objectives of the local environmental plan and met the criteria for a development permit. The applicant's proposal would provide benefits to the community, including increased housing supply and improved public spaces. The court held that the refusal of the permit was unreasonable and unjust, and the decision of the Land and Environment Court was quashed. The appeal was upheld, and the matter was remitted to the Council for reconsideration of the application in light of the court's decision.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal upheld
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.