Denny v Central Coast Council (No 2) [2019] NSWLEC 1565

Denny v Central Coast Council (No 2) [2019] NSWLEC 1565

Because the Notice of Motion was filed within 14 days of entry of the Judgment, rule 36.16(3A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 empowered the Court to vary the Judgment. The evidence that the signed s34 agreement contained the correct condition 4.7 and that the Judgment contained incorrect party and solicitor references was not disputed, and the corrected orders reflected the agreement reached under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and were orders the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Concerning Refusal of Development Application DA 54624/2018 / Notice of Motion to Vary or Correct Judgment and Orders Under Rule 36.16(3 A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
Outcome
Notice of Motion granted; Judgment handed down on 15 October 2019 corrected.
Legal Topics
['development Application for Demolition of Existing Fence and Construction of New Fence' 'conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979' 'correction or Variation of Judgment and Orders' 'conditions of Development Consent']
['planning and Environment' 'civil Procedure'] ['development Application for Demolition of Existing Fence and Construction of New Fence' 'conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979' 'correction or Variation of Judgment and Orders' 'conditions of Development Consent']

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 Concerning Refusal of Development Application DA 54624/2018 / Notice of Motion to Vary or Correct Judgment and Orders Under Rule 36.16(3 A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Judgment handed down on 15 October 2019 should be varied to replace condition 4.7 with the condition in the signed s34 agreement filed on 26 September 2019.' "Whether the Judgment should be corrected to reflect the correct case name, respondent's name and parties' solicitors." 'Whether the Court had power under rule 36.16(3A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 to vary the Judgment after entry where the Notice of Motion was filed within 14 days.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Notice of Motion was filed within 14 days of entry of the Judgment, rule 36.16(3A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 empowered the Court to vary the Judgment. The evidence that the signed s34 agreement contained the correct condition 4.7 and that the Judgment contained incorrect party and solicitor references was not disputed, and the corrected orders reflected the agreement reached under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and were orders the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion granted; Judgment handed down on 15 October 2019 corrected.

Orders

  • ['That the Court correct the Judgment handed down on 15 October 2019 by replacing Condition 4.7 of the Judgment with the condition number 4.7 set out in Annexure A on page 6 of the s34 agreement between the parties and filed on 26 September 2019.' "That the Court correct the Judgment handed down on 15 October 2019...