Lederer & Ors v Sydney City Council [2002] NSWLEC 156

Lederer & Ors v Sydney City Council [2002] NSWLEC 156

The development as proposed to be modified is not substantially the same as the development for which consent was originally granted; both qualitative and quantitative differences, and changed purpose and structure, materially alter the development. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed and the application to modify is refused. Even if the test were not failed at this stage, the proposed modification is contrary to current planning controls and would be refused accordingly.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 September 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Under S 96(6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; application to modify refused
Legal Topics
['development Consent Modification' 'heritage Buildings' 'environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Consent Modification' 'heritage Buildings' 'environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979']

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 / Judgment on Appeal Under S 96(6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed modification results in a development that is substantially the same as the original consent under s 96(2)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979' 'Whether the application for modification should be refused having regard to current planning instruments pursuant to s 96(3) and s 79C']

Ratio Decidendi

The development as proposed to be modified is not substantially the same as the development for which consent was originally granted; both qualitative and quantitative differences, and changed purpose and structure, materially alter the development. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed and the application to modify is refused. Even if the test were not failed at this stage, the proposed modification is contrary to current planning controls and would be refused accordingly.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; application to modify refused

Orders

  • ['The appeal under s 96(6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is dismissed.' 'The application to modify development consent is refused.' 'The exhibits may be returned.']