Veronesi v Ballina Shire Council [2020] NSWLEC 1325

Veronesi v Ballina Shire Council [2020] NSWLEC 1325

The parties' s 34 agreement proposed a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions because the subdivision was permissible under cl 4.2B of the Ballina Local Environmental Plan 2012, would not create an additional lot or opportunity for additional dwelling entitlements having regard to the imposed conditions, and would not adversely impact long-term agricultural production potential or environmental characteristics; with no jurisdictional impediment identified, s 34(3) required the Court to make orders in accordance with the agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Pursuant to S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of a Development Application / Orders Following Conciliation Conference Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and Filing of Parties' Agreement
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['subdivision' 'development Consent' 'boundary Adjustment Subdivision' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties']
['environmental Planning and Assessment' 'land and Environment Court Proceedings'] ['subdivision' 'development Consent' 'boundary Adjustment Subdivision' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties']

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 Pursuant to S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of a Development Application / Orders Following Conciliation Conference Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and Filing of Parties' Agreement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court could make the proposed decision to uphold the appeal and grant development consent in the proper exercise of its functions' "Whether there was any jurisdictional impediment to making orders in accordance with the parties' s 34 agreement"]

Ratio Decidendi

The parties' s 34 agreement proposed a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions because the subdivision was permissible under cl 4.2B of the Ballina Local Environmental Plan 2012, would not create an additional lot or opportunity for additional dwelling entitlements having regard to the imposed conditions, and would not adversely impact long-term agricultural production potential or environmental characteristics; with no jurisdictional impediment identified, s 34(3) required the Court to make orders in accordance with the agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'Development consent is granted to Development application no. DA 2019/170 for the subdivision of land at Lot 1 DP 736181 known as 987 Wardell Road and Lot 2 DP 236129 known as 937 Wardell Road, Meerchaum Vale, to create one x 76.3 ha and one x 6.4 ha allotment from the existing two lots...