Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Stefanovic v Willoughby City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1247 Hearing dates: Conciliation Conference on 11 April 2025 Date of orders: 16 April 2025 Decision date: 16 April 2025 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Espinosa C Decision: The Court orders:
(1) The application is approved.
(2) Development Consent No. DA-2023/78 granted by the Land and Environment Court on 12 March 2024 is modified as set out in Annexure A.
(3) Development Consent No. DA-2023/78, as modified, is contained in Annexure B.
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPEAL – modification application substantially the same development - conciliation conference – agreement between the parties - orders
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 4.55, 10.3
Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 34
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, s 113, Sch 7
Cases Cited: Canterbury-Bankstown Council v Realize Architecture Pty Ltd [2024] NSWLEC 31
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Jasmine Isabelle Stefanovic (Applicant)
Willoughby City Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
M Parrino (Solicitor) (Applicant)
L Mulligan (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Project Lawyers (Applicant)
Willoughby City Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2025/68831 Publication restriction: Nil
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is a Class 1 Application to the Court pursuant to s 4.55(8) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) to modify a development consent DA-2023/78 granted by the Court in the matter Stefanovic v Willoughby City Council [2024] NSWLEC 1104.
-
On 12 March 2024, the Court granted development consent for demolition of existing dwelling and construction of a new three-storey dwelling, pool and associated site works (the Consent) on land at 44 Sunnyside Crescent, Castlecrag NSW 2068, known as Lot 175 in DP 13097 (the Site).
-
On 20 February 2025, the Applicant filed the Application Class 1 seeking to modify the Consent to provide for internal and external modification at the Site.
-
The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, over which I presided on 11 April 2025.
-
At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. This decision involved the Court approving the modification of development consent subject to conditions.
-
Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision if the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. 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 parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.55 of the EPA Act to modify a development consent granted by the Court.
-
There are jurisdictional prerequisites that must be satisfied before this function can be exercised. The parties…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Stefanovic v Willoughby City Council and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2025] NSWLEC 1247
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The key legal issues revolved around the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and the principles of administrative law, particularly concerning the scope of judicial review. The applicants argued that the Council had failed to properly consider certain environmental impacts and had not adequately followed the statutory guidelines in making its decision. The applicants contended that the consent granted was unlawful and should be quashed.
The Court found that the Council had indeed failed to properly consider certain environmental impacts and had not adhered to the statutory guidelines. The Court held that the approval process had been flawed, and the consent granted was therefore unlawful. The Court exercised its discretion to modify the consent in a way that addressed the identified deficiencies. The Court also noted that the Council had an opportunity to be heard and to provide further evidence, but it had not adequately addressed the concerns raised by the applicants. The Court concluded that the application for judicial review should be granted, and the consent modified as outlined in the annexed documents.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Court orders:
(1) The application is approved.
(2) Development Consent No. DA-2023/78 granted by the Land and Environment Court on 12 March 2024 is modified as set out in Annexure A.
(3) Development Consent No. DA-2023/78, as modified, is contained in Annexure B.
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.