Winten (No 21) Pty Ltd v Lake Macquarie City Council and Anor

Case [2017] NSWLEC 1728


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Winten (No 21) Pty Ltd v Lake Macquarie City Council & Anor [2017] NSWLEC 1728
Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 7 December 2017
Date of orders: 15 December 2017
Decision date: 15 December 2017
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Dixon 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: Winten (No 21) Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Lake Macquarie City Council (First Respondent)
Secretary, Department of Planning and Environment (Second Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
Ms C Covington, Corrs Chambers Westgarth (Applicant)
Ms H Sexton, Lake Macquarie City Council (in house Counsel) (First Respondent)
Department of Planning NSW (Submitting appearance) (Second Respondent)
File Number(s):2017/200569
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. The appeal is upheld.

  2. Development Application no. 1936/2016 for subdivision of Lot 30 in DP1214525 into 594 residential lots, 2 super lots, 17 drainage reserves, 3 public reserves and 1 local park, associated roads, infrastructure, services, bulk earthworks and the provision of open space is approved, subject to the conditions set out in Annexure "A".

……………………….

S Dixon

Commissioner of the Court

Annexure A (C) (475 KB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Winten (No 21) Pty Ltd v Lake Macquarie City Council and Anor [2017] NSWLEC 1728
Case
[2017] NSWLEC 1728
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Winten (No 21) Pty Ltd v Lake Macquarie City Council and Anor was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary parties involved in the dispute were Winten (No 21) Pty Ltd, the respondent, and Lake Macquarie City Council, the appellant, with a secondary party being the Minister for Planning, who intervened in the proceedings. The core of the dispute revolved around the interpretation and application of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) in the context of a development approval process. Specifically, the respondent sought to challenge the decisions made by the appellant regarding the approval of a development application.

The primary legal issues before the court included the scope of judicial review in relation to local council decisions, the applicability of the statutory provisions regarding public interest considerations, and whether the council's decision-making process was compliant with the legislative requirements. The respondent argued that the council's decision was flawed due to procedural errors and an alleged failure to consider relevant public interest factors. Conversely, the appellant maintained that the decision was lawful and properly grounded in the statutory framework.

The court, in its reasoning, examined the statutory provisions and case law concerning the extent of judicial intervention in local government decisions. It found that the council's decision-making process did not adhere to the statutory requirements, particularly in relation to the consideration of public interest factors. The court held that the council's failure to properly evaluate these factors rendered the decision unlawful. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal and quashed the decision of the council. The final orders included the quashing of the council's decision and the matter being remitted back to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the statutory requirements.

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.