Alex Hugo Tian v Willoughby City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1749

Alex Hugo Tian v Willoughby City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1749

The parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979, and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions; accordingly, the Court was required to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that decision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Orders Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted to DA-2016/435 subject to conditions at Annexure A.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'development Consent' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'boarding House']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'development Consent' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'boarding House']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Orders Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the agreement reached between the parties under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.' "Whether the proceedings should be disposed of in accordance with the parties' agreement."]

Ratio Decidendi

The parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979, and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions; accordingly, the Court was required to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted to DA-2016/435 subject to conditions at Annexure A.

Orders

  • ['Leave is granted to the Applicant to rely on the amended plans identified in the orders: S34-02 Floor Plans Revision F; S34-03 Roof Plan Revision F; S34-04 Elevations (front and rear) Revision F; S34-05 Elevations (western and eastern) Revision F; S34-06 Section AA, BB Revision F; S34-07 Materials/Finishes...