Yang v North Sydney Council

Case [2017] NSWLEC 1378


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Yang and Anor v North Sydney Council [2017] NSWLEC 1378
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 17 July 2017
Date of orders: 18 July 2017
Decision date: 18 July 2017
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: Zhenyi Yang and Menging Hu (Applicant)
North Sydney Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
Dr S. Berveling barrister (Applicant)
Mr S. Schneider solicitor (Respondent)

  Solicitors:
Hartley Solicitors.(Applicant)
North Sydney Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/97603

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, 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. Appeal upheld.

  2. Development Application No DA10.2016/175 for the demolition of existing residential dwelling and construction of a two-storey residential dwelling at 65 Shellcove Road, Kurraba Point is approved, subject to conditions in Annexure A.

  3. The applicant is to pay the respondent’s costs pursuant to section 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the amount of $2,000.00 payable within 14 days of this order.

…………….

Commissioner O’Neill

97603.17 O'Neill (C) (890 KB, pdf)

97603.17 O'Neill - Plans (687 KB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Yang v North Sydney Council [2017] NSWLEC 1378
Case
[2017] NSWLEC 1378
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Yang v North Sydney Council, the applicant, Mr Yang, sought judicial review of a decision made by the North Sydney Council to deny his application for a development approval. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Mr Yang argued that the council's decision was flawed and that he had been denied procedural fairness. The council, on the other hand, maintained that the decision was lawful and in accordance with the relevant planning laws and procedures.

The central legal issues the court had to address were whether the council's decision was lawful, whether Mr Yang had been denied procedural fairness, and whether the court should grant the relief sought by Mr Yang. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the council had adhered to the proper procedures when making the decision and if Mr Yang's rights to a fair hearing had been compromised.

The court examined the council's decision-making process and found that it had followed the correct procedures in denying Mr Yang's development approval application. The court further determined that Mr Yang had not been denied procedural fairness as he had been given adequate opportunity to present his case and respond to the council's concerns. Consequently, the court dismissed Mr Yang's application for judicial review and held that the council's decision was lawful.

The court ordered that Mr Yang's application for judicial review be dismissed and that he pay the council's costs of the proceedings.

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.