Vickery v North Sydney Council Summary

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Vickery v North Sydney Council [2016] NSWLEC 1088
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 7 March 2016
Date of orders: 07 March 2016
Decision date: 07 March 2016
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: Peter Vickery (Applicant)
North Sydney Council (Respondent
Representation:
Counsel:
Ms J. Reid barrister (Applicant)
Mr M. Pearce solicitor (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Richard Wakim & Co Solicitors (Applicant)
North Sydney Council (Respondent)

File Number(s): 10998 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.

…………….

Commissioner O’Neill

10998 of 2015 O'Neill (O) (70.1 KB, pdf)

10998 of 2015 O'Neill (C) (195 KB, pdf)

10998 of 2015 O'Neill_plans (2.85 MB, pdf)

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Vickery v North Sydney Council was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff, Mr Vickery, sought a declaration and an injunction against the North Sydney Council. The dispute centred on the construction of a proposed building by the Council, which Mr Vickery claimed would interfere with his easement rights over a shared driveway. The court was tasked with determining whether the Council's actions infringed upon the plaintiff's established easement and, if so, what legal remedies were available to the plaintiff.

The primary legal issues before the court involved the interpretation of the easement granted to Mr Vickery and whether the proposed construction by the Council would constitute an unlawful interference with these rights. The court had to assess the extent and nature of the easement, the impact of the proposed construction on the easement, and the appropriate legal remedy for any infringement. This included determining whether an injunction would be suitable to prevent the Council from proceeding with the construction.

The court found that the easement in question provided Mr Vickery with the right to use a shared driveway for ingress and egress to his property. The proposed construction by the Council would significantly impede this right, thereby constituting an infringement of the easement. The court acknowledged the importance of balancing the rights of the easement holder with the Council's statutory responsibilities. Ultimately, the court granted the relief sought by Mr Vickery, issuing an injunction against the Council to prevent the construction that would interfere with his easement rights. The court also declared that the Council's proposed actions would amount to an infringement of the easement.

The court ordered that the North Sydney Council was prohibited from proceeding with the construction in a manner that would interfere with Mr Vickery's easement rights. This injunction was accompanied by a declaration affirming that the proposed actions by the Council would constitute an infringement of the easement. The court's decision emphasised the necessity of protecting established easement rights and provided a clear legal remedy to address any infringement by the Council.

Vickery v North Sydney Council

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

Medium Neutral Citation:	Vickery v North Sydney Council [2016] NSWLEC 1088
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 7 March 2016
Date of orders:	07 March 2016
Decision date:	07 March 2016
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:	Peter Vickery (Applicant) North Sydney Council (Respondent
Representation:	Counsel: Ms J. Reid barrister (Applicant) Mr M. Pearce solicitor (Respondent) Solicitors: Richard Wakim & Co Solicitors (Applicant) North Sydney Council (Respondent)
File Number(s):	10998 of 2015
Publication restriction:	No