Belle & Lily Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2020] NSWLEC 1105
Agreement was reached under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to uphold the appeal and grant development consent subject to conditions, as the requirements for variations to development standards under clause 4.6 of the Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011 were satisfied, and the decision was acceptable to both parties and within the Court's proper exercise of functions.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 10 March 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Under S 8.7 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Conciliation Conference and Final Orders
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld, development consent granted subject to conditions
- Legal Topics
- ['development Application' 'building Height' 'floor Space Ratio' 'clause 4.6 Variation Requests' 'residential Zone Compliance']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S 8.7 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Conciliation Conference and Final Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether development consent should be granted for demolition and construction of multi-dwelling housing and residential flat building' 'Whether clause 4.6 variation requests for height and floor space ratio standards under Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011 should be upheld']
Ratio Decidendi
Agreement was reached under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to uphold the appeal and grant development consent subject to conditions, as the requirements for variations to development standards under clause 4.6 of the Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011 were satisfied, and the decision was acceptable to both parties and within the Court's proper exercise of functions.
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld, development consent granted subject to conditions
Orders
- ['Leave is granted to rely on the listed amended plans and documents.' 'Clause 4.6 requests for contravention of maximum height and floor space ratio standards are upheld.' "Applicant to pay respondent's costs thrown away by reason of the amended application in the sum of $6,600.00 by 22 February 2020." "Development...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment