Universal Property Group Pty Limited v Blacktown City Council

Case [2015] NSWLEC 1531


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Universal Property Group Pty Limited v Blacktown City Council [2015] NSWLEC 1531
Hearing dates:Conciliation conference
Date of orders: 18 December 2015
Decision date: 18 December 2015
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Tuor C
Decision:

See (4) below

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:Principal judgment
Parties:

Universal Property Group Pty Limited (Applicant)

Blacktown City Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Solicitors:
Ms A Spizzo of Landerer & Company (Applicant)

Mr T O’Connor of Houston Dearn O’Conner (Respondent)
File Number(s):10849 of 2015
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, 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.

……………………..

Annelise Tuor

Commissioner of the Court

10849 of 2015 Tuor (18.12.15)(s34O) (109 KB, pdf)

10849 of 2015 Tuor (C) (236 KB, pdf)

10849 of 2015 Tuor_0137_001 (202 KB, pdf)

10849 of 2015 Tuor_Pye road_R04 landscape (2) (4.43 MB, pdf)

10849 of 2015 Tuor_R04-ELEVATION (530 KB, pdf)

10849 of 2015 Tuor_R04-FIRST FLOOR (260 KB, pdf)

10849 of 2015 Tuor_R04-GROUND (676 KB, pdf)

10849 of 2015 Tuor_R04-SECTIONS (625 KB, pdf)

10849 of 2015 Tuor_R04-SHADOW (4.01 MB, pdf)

10849 of 2015 Tuor_R04-SITE (2.12 MB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Universal Property Group Pty Limited v Blacktown City Council [2015] NSWLEC 1531
Case
[2015] NSWLEC 1531
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Universal Property Group Pty Limited was involved in a legal dispute with Blacktown City Council concerning an application for a permit to construct a retail centre in the Blacktown area. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary issue before the court was whether the Council had the authority to approve the proposed retail centre and if the application met the criteria set out in the relevant planning legislation. Specifically, the court had to determine if the application complied with the requirements of the Local Environment Plan and whether the permit should be granted.

The court carefully examined the provisions of the Local Environment Plan and the evidence provided by both parties. It considered whether the proposed retail centre would have a detrimental effect on the surrounding environment and community, as well as whether it complied with the zoning and development standards. The court also evaluated the arguments made by the parties regarding the interpretation of the relevant planning legislation and the application process. The decision hinged on the interpretation of the Local Environment Plan and the evidence presented by both parties.

In its ruling, the court determined that the application did not comply with the relevant planning legislation and that the Council did not have the authority to approve the proposed retail centre. The court found that the proposed development would have a detrimental effect on the surrounding environment and community, and that it did not meet the criteria set out in the Local Environment Plan. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for a permit and ordered that the retail centre could not be constructed as proposed. The court's decision was based on a thorough analysis of the evidence and the interpretation of the relevant planning legislation. The final orders of the court were that the application for a permit be dismissed and that the retail centre could not be constructed as proposed.

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.