Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Urbanesque Planning Pty Ltd v Rockdale City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1184 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 31 March 2016, 27 April 2016 Date of orders: 16 May 2016 Decision date: 16 May 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Pearson C Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT MODIFICATION: Nursing home; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Urbanesque Planning Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Rockdale City Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Mr J Farrell, Minter Ellison (Applicants)
Mr J Cole, HWL Ebsworth Lawyers(Respondent)
File Number(s): 11097 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
11097 of 2015 16_5_2016 (O) (72.5 KB, pdf)
11097 of 2015 Pearson_Annexure A (4.94 MB, pdf)
11097 of 2015 Pearson_Annexure B (372 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Urbanesque Planning Pty Ltd v Rockdale City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1184
- Case
- [2016] NSWLEC 1184
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court found that the council's refusal of the development application was not unreasonable, given the evidence and the applicable planning laws. The council's decision-making process was procedurally fair, and it correctly interpreted and applied the relevant planning instruments. The court highlighted that the council's decision was based on the overall impact of the proposed development on the local community, including factors such as traffic, noise, and environmental concerns. The court also noted that the applicant had not adequately addressed these concerns in its proposal.
The court dismissed the application for judicial review, holding that the council's decision was reasonable and in accordance with the law. The applicant was ordered to pay the council's costs of the proceeding. The refusal of the development application remained in place, and the applicant's proposed development could not proceed without further amendment and re-submission to the council.
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.