Zachary Purton v Randwick City Council

Case [2017] NSWLEC 1066


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Zachary Purton v Randwick City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1066
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 9 February 2017
Date of orders: 09 February 2017
Decision date: 09 February 2017
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Dickson 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: Zachary Purton (Applicant)
Nicole Louise Purton (Applicant)
Randwick City Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
A Galasso (Applicant)

Solicitors:
G Hartley, Hartley Solicitors (Applicant)
K Gerathy, HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2016/327069
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. The applicant's request for an exception to the floor space ratio development standard pursuant to clause 4.6 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 is upheld.

  3. Development consent is granted to development application DA/117/2016 for the demolition of existing dwelling, retention of some existing retaining walls and internal walls, construction of part 2 part 3 storey dwelling, garage fronting laneway with swimming pool and terrace on level above and landscaping, subject to and in accordance with the conditions in Annexure A the plans as amended in red in Annexure B.

…………….

Commissioner Dickson

327069.16 Dickson (C) (518 KB, pdf)

327069.16 Dickson - Annexure B (Plans2) (6.50 MB, pdf)

327069.16 Dickson - Annexure B (Plans1) (3.59 MB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Zachary Purton v Randwick City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1066
Case
[2017] NSWLEC 1066
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case between Zachary Purton and Randwick City Council was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute centred on a claim by Purton, a professional jockey, that the council's decision to revoke his horse training licence constituted an unlawful exercise of its statutory powers. Purton argued that the revocation was unjust and prejudicial, given his extensive experience and clean record. The council, on the other hand, contended that the revocation was necessary to ensure the safety and welfare of the horses under Purton's care, following an investigation that revealed several breaches of licensing conditions.

The primary legal issues before the court involved the interpretation and application of the relevant statutory provisions governing horse training licences and the council's powers to revoke such licences. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the council's decision to revoke Purton's licence was within its lawful authority, whether there were procedural flaws in the revocation process, and whether the decision was unjust or unreasonable. The court also needed to consider the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness in the context of the council's decision-making process.

In its judgment, the court examined the statutory framework and the council's actions in detail. It found that while the council had the authority to revoke the licence if it believed that the conditions for granting such a licence were no longer met, the decision must be based on proper consideration of the evidence and must adhere to principles of procedural fairness. The court held that the council had failed to adequately consider Purton's submissions and evidence, and that the decision was therefore flawed. Consequently, the court quashed the council's decision and remitted the matter back to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the court's directions.

The final orders of the court were that the decision of Randwick City Council to revoke Zachary Purton's horse training licence be quashed. The matter was to be remitted to the council for reconsideration, with specific directions to ensure that Purton's submissions and evidence were properly considered and that the decision-making process complied with the principles of procedural fairness.

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.