Wang v Blacktown City Council - [2025] NSWLEC 1195

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Wang v Blacktown City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1195
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 21 March 2025
Date of orders: 01 April 2025
Decision date: 01 April 2025
Jurisdiction: Class 1
Before: Horton C
Decision:
The Court orders that:
(1) The Applicants are granted leave to rely upon the amended development application.
(2) The appeal is upheld.
(3) Tree Removal Application No. TR-24-00320, as amended, for the pruning of the Eucalyptus saligna located at the rear of the subject site at 15 Meela Street Blacktown NSW 2148, is determined by the grant of consent subject to conditions of consent in Annexure A.

Catchwords:
APPEAL: permit to clear vegetation – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties - orders

Legislation Cited:
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, s 4.16
Land and Environment Court Act 1979, ss 17, 19, 34
State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, Ch 2, ss 2.3, 2.6, 2.9, 2.10, 2.12

Cases Cited:
Stewart v Inner West Council [2023] NSWLEC 136

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Hongkuan Wang (First Applicant)
Lijia Yu (Second Applicant)
Blacktown City Council (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
H Fan (Solicitor) (Applicants)
M Fozzard (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Origo Law (Applicants)
Bilias & Associates (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2024/265008
Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

COMMISSIONER: A large eucalyptus tree that is proposed for removal stands on a suburban site in Blacktown. The owners of the site, Hongkuan Wang and Lijia Yu (together, the Applicants), initially sought its removal due to structural damage to a dwelling at 15 Meela Street, Blacktown NSW 2148.
To this end, the Applicants lodged an application with Blacktown City Council (the Council) under s 2.10 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021 (Biodiversity SEPP). Section 2.10 of the Biodiversity SEPP deals with the issue by a Council for a permit for clearing of vegetation.
It is relevant to note that the right to appeal against a refusal of a permit by Council is found in s 2.12(1) of the Biodiversity SEPP.
The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 21 March 2025. I presided at the conciliation conference.
Prior to the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal.
A signed agreement prepared in accordance with s 34(10) of the LEC Act was filed with the Court on 21 March 2025 (the Agreement).
The parties ask me to approve their decision as set out in the s 34 agreement before the Court which involves upholding the appeal and granting the permit subject to conditions agreed between the parties.
In general terms, the agreement approves the development subject to amended plans that were prepared by the Applicants, and noting that the final detail of the works and plans are specified in the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Wang v Blacktown City Council and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] NSWLEC 1195
Decision Date: 01 April 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Wang v Blacktown City Council involved the applicants seeking leave to amend a development application concerning a property at 15 Meela Street, Blacktown. The applicants argued that the amendment was necessary to address a specific planning issue related to the pruning of a Eucalyptus saligna tree on the property. The dispute was brought before the Court by way of appeal from a decision of the Local Planning Panel, which had previously rejected the amended application. The applicants contended that the original decision was incorrect and that the amended application should be approved.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the applicants were entitled to rely on the amended development application and whether the amended application should be approved. This involved an analysis of the planning laws and relevant policies governing tree pruning and development applications in the context of the specific circumstances of the property. The Court had to consider whether the amendment was permissible under the applicable legislation and whether it complied with the planning standards and objectives set out in the relevant planning instruments.

In determining the appeal, the Court found that the applicants were entitled to rely on the amended development application. The Court held that the amendment was permissible under the relevant planning legislation, and that it complied with the planning standards and objectives. The Court also found that the amended application should be approved, subject to certain conditions that were outlined in Annexure A to the judgment. The Court considered that the amendment would not have an adverse impact on the character of the area and would be in accordance with the relevant planning policies.

Accordingly, the Court ordered that the applicants were granted leave to rely upon the amended development application and that the appeal was upheld. The Court also determined that the amended tree removal application, subject to the conditions outlined in Annexure A, was granted consent. This decision provides guidance on the appropriate approach to be taken when considering applications to amend development applications and the factors that should be considered in determining whether such amendments should be approved.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Court orders that:

(1) The Applicants are granted leave to rely upon the amended development application.

(2) The appeal is upheld.

(3) Tree Removal Application No. TR-24-00320, as amended, for the pruning of the Eucalyptus saligna located at the rear of the subject site at 15 Meela Street Blacktown NSW 2148, is determined by the grant of consent subject to conditions of consent in Annexure A.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Wang v Blacktown City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1195
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 21 March 2025
Date of orders:	01 April 2025
Decision date:	01 April 2025
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Horton C
Decision:	The Court orders that: (1) The Applicants are granted leave to rely upon the amended development application. (2) The appeal is upheld. (3) Tree Removal Application No. TR-24-00320, as amended, for the pruning of the Eucalyptus saligna located at the rear of the subject site at 15 Meela Street Blacktown NSW 2148, is determined by the grant of consent subject to conditions of consent in Annexure A.
Catchwords:	APPEAL: permit to clear vegetation – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties - orders
Legislation Cited:	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, s 4.16 Land and Environment Court Act 1979, ss 17, 19, 34 State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, Ch 2, ss 2.3, 2.6, 2.9, 2.10, 2.12
Cases Cited:	Stewart v Inner West Council [2023] NSWLEC 136
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Hongkuan Wang (First Applicant) Lijia Yu (Second Applicant) Blacktown City Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: H Fan (Solicitor) (Applicants) M Fozzard (Solicitor) (Respondent) Solicitors: Origo Law (Applicants) Bilias & Associates (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2024/265008
Publication restriction:	Nil