Sue Sanki v Woollahra Municipal Council

[2017] NSWLEC 1333

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Sue Sanki v Woollahra Municipal Council [2017] NSWLEC 1333
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 22 and 23 June 2017
Date of orders:	28 June 2017
Decision date:	28 June 2017
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Smithson C
Decision:	See (4) below
Catchwords:	MODIFICATION APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited:	Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Sue Sanki (Applicant) Woollahra Municipal Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Solicitor: Mr V Conomos, Conomos Legal (Applicant) Mr S Patterson, Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2017/63216
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 make, 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 Applicant is granted leave to amend Modification Application No. DA/285/2015/4 and to rely upon the following plans and documentation in the proceedings:

Reference	Description	Author/Drawn	Date(s)
04 U 06 U 07 U 08 U 09 U 10 U 11 U	Architectural Plans	Christopher Jordan Architecture and Design	27.04.17

2. The appeal is upheld.

3. Section 96 Modification Application No. DA/285/2015/4 is approved subject to the conditions in ‘Annexure A’.

……………………….

Commissioner Smithson

63216.17 Smithson (C) (106 KB, docx)

Decision last updated: 28 June 2017