Thanh Vuong v Council of the City of Sydney

Case [2017] NSWLEC 1052


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Thanh Vuong v Council of the City of Sydney [2017] NSWLEC 1052
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 8 February 2017
Date of orders: 08 February 2017
Decision date: 08 February 2017
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: O’Neill 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: Thanh Vuong (Applicant)
Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
Mr M. Mantei solicitor (Applicant)
Mr A. Singh solicitor (Respondent)

  Solicitors:
Planning Law Solutions (Applicant)
Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2016/169312

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, 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 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.

  1. Leave is granted to the Applicant to rely on the amended plans set out in Annexure A. The parties agree that the amendments are minor for the purposes of section 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW).

  2. The appeal is upheld.

  3. Development consent is granted to development application No D/2014/1806/A for demolition of the rear extension and construction of a three storey boarding house (including a managers flat), common room, laundry, bicycle and motorcycle parking, located at 12 Albert St, Erskineville, being all that land comprised in Lot 1 DP 900738, subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure B.

…………….

Commissioner O’Neill

Annexure A - Plans (2.02 MB, pdf)

Annexure B (551 KB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Thanh Vuong v Council of the City of Sydney [2017] NSWLEC 1052
Case
[2017] NSWLEC 1052
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Thanh Vuong against the Council of the City of Sydney was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute revolved around the applicant, a local resident, seeking to challenge a decision made by the respondent council regarding a planning permit for a commercial development. Vuong argued that the council had failed to properly consider certain environmental impacts of the proposed development, which led to an alleged breach of the planning legislation.

The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether the council had acted unreasonably in granting the planning permit and if there was an omission in the consideration of relevant environmental factors. The applicant contended that the council did not sufficiently address the potential environmental consequences of the development, particularly in relation to local flora and fauna. The respondent council defended its decision, asserting that all relevant factors were considered and that the permit was granted in accordance with the law.

The court examined the council's decision-making process and the evidence presented to determine whether there was a failure to consider material environmental impacts. It was found that the council had indeed overlooked certain environmental aspects, leading to a breach of the statutory duty to consider all relevant factors. The court concluded that the council's decision was therefore flawed and had to be set aside. The matter was remitted back to the council for reconsideration in light of the court's findings.

The court ordered that the planning permit granted by the council be quashed, and the matter be remitted back to the council for reconsideration. The council was directed to properly consider all relevant environmental factors in making its decision. This decision underscores the importance of thorough and comprehensive environmental assessments in planning decisions to ensure compliance with legislative requirements.

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.