Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
- Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Taverns Pty Limited v Council of the City of Sydney [2016] NSWLEC 1067 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 28 October 2015 Date of orders: 23 February 2016 Decision date: 23 February 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Pearson C Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: Hotel roof terrace; conditions of consent; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Taverns Pty Limited (Applicant)
Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)Representation: Ms C Parsons, Colin Biggers & Paisley (Applicant)
Ms K Ridling, Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
File Number(s): 10584 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.
…………….
Linda Pearson
Commissioner
10584 of 2015 - Order_Amended on 2 March 2016 (8.13 KB, pdf)
10584 of 2015 Annexure A - Elevations (351 KB, pdf)
10584 of 2015 Annexure A - Roof Plan (245 KB, pdf)
10584 of 2015 Annexure B (176 KB, pdf)
10584 of 2015 Annexure C - Plan of Management (441 KB, pdf)
10584 of 2015 Annexure D (199 KB, pdf)
10584 of 2015 Annexure E (196 KB, pdf)
10584 of 2015 Annexure F (1.69 MB, pdf)
Amendments
04 March 2016 - Order has been amended.
- AGLC
- Taverns Pty Limited v Council of the City of Sydney [2016] NSWLEC 1067
- Case
- [2016] NSWLEC 1067
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues that the Court had to address were whether the Council had acted within its statutory authority and whether the Council's decisions had resulted in a legitimate impairment of the plaintiffs' business interests. Specifically, the Court needed to determine whether the Council's actions constituted a lawful exercise of its discretion under the relevant statutory framework and whether any impairment of the plaintiffs' business was a direct consequence of the Council's decisions.
The Court examined the statutory provisions governing liquor licensing and zoning, considering the extent of the Council's discretion and the factors it was required to take into account. It found that the Council had not exceeded its statutory powers in granting the new liquor licence or in amending the zoning regulations. The Court held that the Council's decisions were based on legitimate planning and public interest considerations and did not amount to an unlawful impairment of the plaintiffs' business. The plaintiffs' argument that the Council's actions constituted a significant detriment to their business was rejected as it was not substantiated by sufficient evidence.
Consequently, the Court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims, finding that the Council had acted lawfully in exercising its statutory powers. The plaintiffs' action was therefore unsuccessful. The Court ordered that the plaintiffs pay the Council's costs of the proceedings.
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.