Van der Velden v Inner West Council

Case [2018] NSWLEC 1351


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Van der Velden v Inner West Council [2018] NSWLEC 1351
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 9 July 2018
Date of orders: 10 July 2018
Decision date: 10 July 2018
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: O’Neill C
Decision:

See [4] below

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Frances Van der Velden (1st Applicant)
Sebastian Cox (2nd Applicant)
Inner West Council (Respondent)
Representation: Counsel:
M Staunton (Applicant)
Solicitors:
Sattler & Associates Pty Ltd (Applicant)
P Vergotis, Inner West Council(Respondent)
File Number(s): 2018/6644
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 make, 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 under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:

  1. Leave is granted to rely upon the following amended plans:

  1. Architectural Plans drawing Nos. DA 01 – DA 12 & DA 24 all revision D prepared by Coso Architects all dated 9 July 2018;

  2. Landscape Plans Nos. LP02 and LP03 all revision A prepared by Selena Hannan dated 6 June 2018;

  3. Stormwater Plans Nos. SW1 Rev D & SW2 Rev B prepared by E2 Civil and Structural Design Pty Limited dated 4 July 2018.

  1. The Appeal is upheld.

  2. Development Application No. D/2017/450 for demolition of existing structures and construction of a part single/part two storey dwelling with basement, new tandem garage, swimming pool and associated landscaping at 27 Isabella Street, Balmain is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure ‘A’.

……………………….

Susan O’Neill

Commissioner of the Court

Annexure A (C)

Annexure B

Amendments

11 July 2018 - Corrected formatting of orders on cover sheet.

Details
AGLC
Van der Velden v Inner West Council [2018] NSWLEC 1351
Case
[2018] NSWLEC 1351
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Van der Velden v Inner West Council, the parties were the applicant, Van der Velden, and the respondent, Inner West Council. The dispute arose from the applicant's challenge of a decision made by the respondent council to grant a development permit. The case was heard in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales. The applicant contested the validity of the decision, asserting that it was based on an incorrect interpretation of the relevant planning laws and that the council failed to properly consider certain environmental impacts.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the council's decision was made in accordance with the statutory requirements, and if it had adequately considered the environmental implications of the proposed development. Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the council had exercised its discretion appropriately and whether the decision-making process complied with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

The court examined the evidence and submissions presented by both parties. It found that the council had correctly interpreted the planning laws but had erred in not adequately considering the potential environmental impacts of the development. The court held that the council's decision was invalid due to this procedural flaw. Consequently, the court quashed the decision and remitted the matter back to the council for reconsideration, ensuring that all relevant environmental factors were properly evaluated.

The final orders of the court were to quash the decision of the Inner West Council granting the development permit and to remit the matter back to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the law.

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.