Dominelli v Sutherland Shire Council [2023] NSWLEC 1055

Dominelli v Sutherland Shire Council [2023] NSWLEC 1055

Because the parties reached agreement, the Commissioner was satisfied that the amended development application met the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites, including permissibility in the C3 Environmental Management Zone, adequate justification for the cl 4.6 height variation, satisfaction of relevant SSLEP and SEPP considerations, and appropriate conditions of consent. The agreed decision was therefore one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, requiring disposal of the proceedings in accordance with that decision under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Application Appeal Concerning Deemed Refusal of Da22/0708 / Orders Following Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'clause 4.6 Variation Request' 'height of Buildings Development Standard' 'dwelling House' 'boatshed' 'swimming Pool' 'foreshore Development' 'tree Removal' 'environmental Planning Instruments']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'clause 4.6 Variation Request' 'height of Buildings Development Standard' 'dwelling House' 'boatshed' 'swimming Pool' 'foreshore Development' 'tree Removal' 'environmental Planning Instruments']

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

Class 1 Development Application Appeal Concerning Deemed Refusal of Da22/0708 / Orders Following Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether the cl 4.6 written request adequately justified contravention of the height of buildings development standard in cl 4.3 of the Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015.' 'Whether development consent should be granted for DA22/0708 subject to conditions.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties reached agreement, the Commissioner was satisfied that the amended development application met the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites, including permissibility in the C3 Environmental Management Zone, adequate justification for the cl 4.6 height variation, satisfaction of relevant SSLEP and SEPP considerations, and appropriate conditions of consent. The agreed decision was therefore one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, requiring disposal of the proceedings in accordance with that decision under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The cl 4.6 written request prepared by Urbanesque Planning dated 23 June 2022 for a variation to the height of building development standard under cl 4.3 of the Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 is upheld.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development Application No. DA22/0708 in respect of 1A Yellambie...