Vinogradov v Central Coast Council [2023] NSWLEC 1731

Vinogradov v Central Coast Council [2023] NSWLEC 1731

The amended development application was permissible with consent on R1 General Residential land, the relevant environmental planning instruments and jurisdictional requirements had been considered and satisfied, Council's contentions and objector issues had been resolved, and there were no jurisdictional impediments to the parties' agreement. Because the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement and grant consent subject to conditions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application Da/349/2023 / Conciliation Conference Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Final Orders by Agreement
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; Applicant ordered to pay Respondent's costs thrown away in the agreed amount of $12,000 ex GST.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'multi Dwelling Housing Development' 'deemed Refusal Appeal' 'conciliation Conference' 'grant of Consent Subject to Conditions' 'costs Thrown Away']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent'] ['development Application' 'multi Dwelling Housing Development' 'deemed Refusal Appeal' 'conciliation Conference' 'grant of Consent Subject to Conditions' 'costs Thrown Away']

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 Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application Da/349/2023 / Conciliation Conference Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Final Orders by Agreement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court could grant consent to amended Development Application DA/349/2023 for demolition of existing structures and construction of multi-dwelling housing for three dwellings at 102 Bay Road, Blue Bay.' "Whether the parties' agreement reached at the conciliation conference was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions." 'Whether relevant jurisdictional prerequisites under planning legislation and instruments were satisfied.']

Ratio Decidendi

The amended development application was permissible with consent on R1 General Residential land, the relevant environmental planning instruments and jurisdictional requirements had been considered and satisfied, Council's contentions and objector issues had been resolved, and there were no jurisdictional impediments to the parties' agreement. Because the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement and grant consent subject to conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; Applicant ordered to pay Respondent's costs thrown away in the agreed amount of $12,000 ex GST.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'Development Application DA/349/2023, which seeks the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a multi dwelling housing development, consisting of three dwellings, landscaping and associated works on Lot 113 Sec 1 in Deposited Plan 11935, also known as 102 Bay Road, Blue...