Crown Sydney Property v Barangaroo Delivery Authority; Lendlease (Millers Point) v Barangaroo Delivery Authority [2018] NSWSC 1931

Crown Sydney Property v Barangaroo Delivery Authority; Lendlease (Millers Point) v Barangaroo Delivery Authority [2018] NSWSC 1931

The sight lines clauses in the development agreements required the Authority, upon receiving an application for development differing from the approved Concept Plan, to engage in good faith discussions and negotiations with Crown and Lendlease starting from the proposition of retaining sight lines. The obligation was triggered at least when Grocon was selected as preferred bidder, and the Authority breached the clauses by considering applications without proper negotiation as required.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial List Equity Proceedings / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Declarations granted for breach of sight lines clauses; costs orders in favour of plaintiffs; orders for return of exhibits and directions; liberty to apply reserved.
Legal Topics
['good Faith Negotiation' 'construction of Contract' 'sight Lines Protection' 'planning Approval Process']
['contract Law' 'equity' 'commercial Law'] ['good Faith Negotiation' 'construction of Contract' 'sight Lines Protection' 'planning Approval Process']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Commercial List Equity Proceedings / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Proper construction and application of sight lines clauses in development agreements' "Timing and content of the Authority's obligation to negotiate in good faith" "Nature of 'application' triggering negotiation obligations" 'Whether the Authority breached the sight lines clauses by considering applications without good faith negotiation']

Ratio Decidendi

The sight lines clauses in the development agreements required the Authority, upon receiving an application for development differing from the approved Concept Plan, to engage in good faith discussions and negotiations with Crown and Lendlease starting from the proposition of retaining sight lines. The obligation was triggered at least when Grocon was selected as preferred bidder, and the Authority breached the clauses by considering applications without proper negotiation as required.

Court Disposition

Declarations granted for breach of sight lines clauses; costs orders in favour of plaintiffs; orders for return of exhibits and directions; liberty to apply reserved.

Orders

  • ["Declare that each of the Grocon Applications pleaded was an 'application' for the purposes of cl 5.5(c) (CDA) and cl 2.5(c) (PDA)." 'Declare that Barangaroo Delivery Authority breached cl 5.5 of CDA and cl 2.5 of PDA by considering those applications without negotiating in good faith for retention of sight lines.'...