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
-
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 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
The appeal is upheld.
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)
- AGLC
- Sue Sanki v Woollahra Municipal Council [2017] NSWLEC 1333
- Case
- [2017] NSWLEC 1333
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with balancing Ms Sanki's personal health concerns against the Council's duty to ensure public safety. It needed to determine whether the removal of the tree constituted an unreasonable interference with her property rights and if the Council's actions were justified under the relevant legislation. The court also had to consider the proportionality of the Council's response and whether alternative measures could be implemented to address the safety concerns without resorting to tree removal.
In its decision, the court acknowledged the significant health impact the tree pollen had on Ms Sanki. However, it found that the public safety concerns raised by the Council were compelling and warranted action. The court concluded that the removal of the tree was a proportionate response to the risk posed by its diseased condition. It held that while Ms Sanki's health was a legitimate concern, it did not outweigh the imperative to protect public safety. The court granted the Council's application, allowing the tree to be removed.
ORDERS:
The court granted the Woollahra Municipal Council's application to remove the tree, despite Ms Sanki's objections based on her health concerns. The court found that the Council's actions were justified under the relevant legislation and that the removal was a proportionate response to the safety risks posed by the tree.
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.