Allen Jack & Cottier v Manly Council [2006] NSWLEC 288

Allen Jack & Cottier v Manly Council [2006] NSWLEC 288

The conditions to retain or rebuild the rear chimney and fireplace and dedicate land for road widening were found to be unreasonable, not supported by planning or heritage grounds or statutory requirement; similarly, requiring modification/deletion of the proposed balcony was not justified as the agreed solution would have an acceptable heritage impact.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Appeal upheld
Legal Topics
['development Consent Conditions' 'heritage Impact' 'road Widening' 'dedication of Land']

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

Appeal / Hearing and Judgment

  1. 1 ['Whether conditions imposed on development consent regarding retention/rebuilding of chimney and fireplace were reasonable' 'Whether condition to delete proposed balcony with louvred shutter appropriate for heritage protection' 'Whether requirement to dedicate land for road widening as a condition of consent was reasonable']

Ratio Decidendi

The conditions to retain or rebuild the rear chimney and fireplace and dedicate land for road widening were found to be unreasonable, not supported by planning or heritage grounds or statutory requirement; similarly, requiring modification/deletion of the proposed balcony was not justified as the agreed solution would have an acceptable heritage impact.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' "The development application (DA 508/04) is approved subject to Annexure 'A' conditions." 'Exhibits, except exhibits 1 and B, may be returned.']