Verde Terra Pty Ltd v Central Coast Council; Central Coast Council v Verde Terra Pty Ltd (No 2)

Verde Terra Pty Ltd was the owner of land on the Central Coast of New South Wales, which was subject to a Development Control Plan (DCP) administered by Central Coast Council. The DCP imposed restrictions on the use and development of the land, including prohibiting the construction of a dwelling on the land without the council's consent. Verde Terra sought a declaration that the DCP was invalid, and the council sought a declaration that the DCP was valid. The dispute came before the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, which was required to determine the validity of the DCP and the extent to which it was binding on Verde Terra.

The court had to decide several issues, including whether the DCP was validly made under the relevant planning legislation, whether the DCP was binding on Verde Terra, and whether the DCP was inconsistent with any higher-ranking planning instruments. The court also had to consider whether the council had waived or lost any rights to enforce the DCP, and whether Verde Terra had any entitlement to compensation for the restrictions imposed by the DCP. The court had to interpret the relevant planning legislation and consider relevant authorities and precedents to reach its decision.

The court found that the DCP was validly made under the relevant planning legislation and was binding on Verde Terra. The court rejected Verde Terra's arguments that the DCP was inconsistent with higher-ranking planning instruments or that the council had waived or lost its rights to enforce the DCP. The court also found that Verde Terra was not entitled to compensation for the restrictions imposed by the DCP. The court relied on a range of statutory provisions, authorities, and precedents to support its decision. The court emphasised the importance of the planning legislation in regulating land use and development and the need for certainty and predictability in planning outcomes.

The court made several orders in favour of the council, including a declaration that the DCP was valid and binding on Verde Terra, and a declaration that the council had not waived or lost its rights to enforce the DCP. The court also dismissed Verde Terra's claims for declarations and orders that the DCP was invalid or that Verde Terra was entitled to compensation. The court did not make any orders for costs.