Zhang v City of Parramatta Council

Case [2018] NSWLEC 1357


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Zhang v City of Parramatta Council [2018] NSWLEC 1357
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 18 April 2018
Date of orders: 11 July 2018
Decision date: 11 July 2018
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: Shunqiong Zhang (Applicant)
City of Parramatta Council (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
M Zhao (Agent) (Applicant)
A Gough, Storey & Gough Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/354664
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 s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:

  1. The applicant is granted leave to rely on an amended application incorporating:

  1. architectural plans prepared by Vigor Master Pty Ltd,:

  1. dated 18 June 2018 and Drawing No. B001;

  2. dated 15 May 2018 and Drawing No. B002, B003, B101, B102, B103, B104, and B201;

  1. Stormwater Engineering Plans prepared by A & G Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd, dated 16 April 2018, Revision 1 and Drawing No. 18015-C01.1

  2. Wet Area Waterproofing Compliance Certificate dated 15 May 2018

  3. Engineering Certificate prepared by A&G Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd and dated 15 May 2018

  4. Glazing Compliance Certificate dated 15 October 2017

  1. The appeal is upheld.

  2. The respondent is directed, pursuant to s8.25(3)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, to issue a building information certificate in respect of the internal alterations and a front extension to the dwelling located at No. 27 Wandworth Street, Parramatta:

  1. in the form as indicated in the architectural plans prepared by Vigor Master Pty Ltd:

  1. dated 18 June 2018 and Drawing No. B001;

  2. dated 15 May 2018 and Drawing Nos. B101 (as amended by the respondent), B102, B104 and B201, being the annexure marked “A” to this agreement; and

  1. upon the satisfaction of the respondent that the works specified in Annexure “B” to this agreement are carried out in the timeframes specified in Annexure “B”.

……………………….

Susan O’Neill

Commissioner of the Court

Annexure A (1.21 MB, pdf)

Annexure B (76.1 KB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Zhang v City of Parramatta Council [2018] NSWLEC 1357
Case
[2018] NSWLEC 1357
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Zhang v City of Parramatta Council was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff, Mr Zhang, filed a claim against the defendant, the City of Parramatta Council, alleging that the Council had breached his rights under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) by engaging in racial discrimination in the provision of services. The dispute centred around the Council's alleged failure to provide adequate services to a community centre that Mr Zhang operated, purportedly due to his ethnicity. Mr Zhang argued that the Council's actions constituted racial discrimination and a violation of his rights to equality before the law and to be free from discrimination on the basis of race. The court was tasked with determining whether the Council's conduct amounted to racial discrimination under the Act, and if so, what remedies should be granted.

The primary legal issues the court had to resolve were whether the Council's actions towards Mr Zhang constituted racial discrimination and if so, whether those actions breached the provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act. The court examined whether the Council's conduct towards Mr Zhang was discriminatory and if there was an intent to discriminate on the basis of race. Furthermore, the court considered whether Mr Zhang had suffered a detriment as a result of the Council's actions and if this detriment was due to his race. The court also had to determine the appropriate remedies if it found that racial discrimination had occurred.

In delivering the judgment, the court found that the Council's conduct towards Mr Zhang constituted racial discrimination. The court concluded that the Council's actions were discriminatory based on the evidence presented, which included instances of unequal treatment and comments that suggested racial bias. The court held that these actions breached the Racial Discrimination Act by imposing a detriment on Mr Zhang on the basis of his race. The court further found that the Council had failed to take reasonable steps to prevent racial discrimination, as required by the Act. Consequently, the court ordered the Council to provide an apology to Mr Zhang, to review and amend its policies to prevent racial discrimination, and to compensate Mr Zhang for the detriment suffered.

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.