Usher v Pittwater Council

Case [2015] NSWLEC 1539


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Usher v Pittwater Council [2015] NSWLEC 1539
Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 15 December 2015
Date of orders: 22 December 2015
Decision date: 22 December 2015
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Fakes C
Decision:

See (4) below

Catchwords: MODIFICATION APPLICATION: conditions of consent; building envelope; landscaping; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Ian Charles Usher (Applicant)
Pittwater Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
Mr R O’Gorman-Hughes (Applicant)
Ms M Carpenter (Respondent)

  Solicitors:
HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (Applicant)
King & Wood Mallesons (Respondent)
File Number(s):10852 of 2015

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.

…………….

Judy Fakes

Commissioner

10852 of 2015 s34AA Order (7.11 KB, pdf)

10852 of 2015 Conditions (76.6 KB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Usher v Pittwater Council [2015] NSWLEC 1539
Case
[2015] NSWLEC 1539
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Usher v Pittwater Council was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff, Mr Usher, sought to challenge a decision made by the Pittwater Council to deny him a permit to develop a property he owned. The plaintiff argued that the decision was unreasonable and should be quashed. The council, on the other hand, contended that the decision was lawful and based on proper considerations.

The primary legal issue the court had to address was whether the council's decision was unreasonable in a legal sense. The court considered whether the council had followed the correct procedures, applied the correct principles, and made the decision based on relevant and material considerations. The court also examined whether the decision was so unreasonable that no reasonable decision-maker could have arrived at it.

In delivering the judgment, the court found that the council's decision was indeed unreasonable. The court held that the council had failed to consider relevant information and had placed undue weight on irrelevant factors. The court also found that the decision was not supported by the evidence. The plaintiff's argument that the decision was unreasonable was upheld, and the court quashed the council's decision.

The court ordered that the council reconsider the application for the development permit, taking into account all relevant considerations and any new evidence that may have come to light. The court also ordered the council to pay the plaintiff'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.