Barr Property and Planning Pty Ltd v Cessnock City Council [2021] NSWLEC 108

Barr Property and Planning Pty Ltd v Cessnock City Council [2021] NSWLEC 108

The proposed amendment was a significant change to the development application, altering the process and substance of assessment. The amendment failed to include sufficient particulars required by cl 55 of the Regulation and the Court's practice note for Class 1 appeals. Consequently, the Court declined to exercise its discretion under s 39(2) to allow the amendment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 / Notice of Motion to Amend Development Application
Outcome
Notice of Motion dismissed
Legal Topics
['amendment of Development Application' 'exercise of Court Discretion Under S 39 LEC Act' 'concept Development Application' 'procedural Sufficiency']
['civil Procedure' 'planning and Environment'] ['amendment of Development Application' 'exercise of Court Discretion Under S 39 LEC Act' 'concept Development Application' 'procedural Sufficiency']

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 / Notice of Motion to Amend Development Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Applicant should be granted leave to amend the Class 1 development application' 'Whether the amendment application provides sufficient particulars as required by cl 55 of the Regulation and Court practice note' 'Whether the proposed amendment changes the overall essence of the development' 'Whether the Court should exercise discretion under s 39(2) Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to permit the amendment']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed amendment was a significant change to the development application, altering the process and substance of assessment. The amendment failed to include sufficient particulars required by cl 55 of the Regulation and the Court's practice note for Class 1 appeals. Consequently, the Court declined to exercise its discretion under s 39(2) to allow the amendment.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed

Orders

  • ['Notice of Motion filed 6 August 2021 by the Applicant is dismissed' 'The Applicant is to pay the Respondents costs of the Notice of Motion' 'The exhibits are returned; they are to be collected from the Associate within 7 days of the order']