Vigor Master Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council

Case [2018] NSWLEC 1002


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Vigor Master Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council [2018] NSWLEC 1002
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 1 December 2017
Date of orders: 05 January 2018
Decision date: 05 January 2018
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Smithson 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: Vigor Master Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Ku-ring-gai Council (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
Ms I Wang, Litigant in Person (Applicant)
Mr J Merlino, HWL Ebsworth (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/230627
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. I note also that the Applicant undertakes as part of the agreement to pay the Respondent’s costs to the amount of $3,000.

  5. The final orders to give effect to the parties’ agreement under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979, are:

  1. The appeal is upheld.

  2. The Applicant is granted leave to rely upon the amended plans and documents listed in condition 1 of Annexure "A" hereto.

  3. Application No. MOD048/17 for excavation, construction of stairs, retaining walls and a pathway at the Larkin Street frontage of the property, is approved subject to the conditions annexed and marked “A”.

……………………….

Jenny Smithson

Commissioner of the Land and Environment Court of NSW

Annexure A (C) (83.4 KB, docx)

Details
AGLC
Vigor Master Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council [2018] NSWLEC 1002
Case
[2018] NSWLEC 1002
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Vigor Master Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council, the plaintiff, Vigor Master, sought to challenge a decision made by the defendant, Ku-ring-gai Council, to refuse a development application. The application was for the construction of a residential development on land owned by Vigor Master. The matter was heard by the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Council's decision to refuse the development application was lawful, rational, and in accordance with the relevant planning legislation and policies. The court had to determine if the Council's decision was based on relevant considerations, and if the decision was open to challenge on the grounds of unreasonableness or procedural impropriety.

The court found that the Council's decision was based on relevant considerations and was not unreasonable or procedurally improper. The court concluded that the Council had correctly identified potential environmental impacts and had given appropriate weight to the relevant planning policies. The court also found that the decision-making process was transparent and that there were no procedural defects in the way the decision was made.

As a result, the court dismissed the plaintiff's application and upheld the Council's decision. The court did not make any orders for costs.

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.