Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Wyatt v The Council of the City of Sydney [2018] NSWLEC 1111 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 26 October and 13 November 2017, 28 February 2018 Date of orders: 06 March 2018 Decision date: 06 March 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 2 Before: Maston AC 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: Neville William Wyatt (First Applicant)
Julie Maree Wyatt (Second Applicant)
The Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Neville Wyatt, Wyatts Lawyers & Advisors (Applicant)
Kirsten Morrin, The Council of the City of Sydney (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/177164 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 make, 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 under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:
The Applicants are granted an exemption under s 22 of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 in the terms of Annexure A.
The appeal is upheld.
The Applicants are granted a Certificate of Compliance under s 22D of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 in the terms of Annexure B.
……………………….
John Maston
Acting Commissioner
Annexure A (36.6 KB, pdf)
Annexure B (55.5 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Wyatt v The Council of the City of Sydney [2018] NSWLEC 1111
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 1111
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the court were whether the council's decision to refuse the permit was lawful, and if the council had acted irrationally or failed to consider relevant factors. The plaintiff contended that the council did not provide adequate reasons for the refusal and had not properly balanced the heritage conservation objectives against the proposed development. The council argued that the decision was based on appropriate considerations and was in accordance with relevant legislative and policy frameworks.
The court examined the council's decision-making process and the evidence presented. It found that the council had adequately considered the heritage values of the site and had provided sufficient reasons for its decision. The court determined that the council's decision was not unreasonable and was supported by the evidence. Consequently, the court dismissed the plaintiff's application for judicial review.
The final order of the court was that the plaintiff's application for a writ of mandamus and declaration was dismissed, and the council's decision to refuse the permit was upheld. The court also awarded costs to the defendant.
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.