BFD Pymble Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council [2016] NSWLEC 1315
Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the proceedings were required to be disposed of in accordance with that agreement, by upholding the appeal and granting development consent subject to conditions.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 25 July 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Class 1 Appeal Against Refusal of Development Application No. 0145/15 / Final Orders Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
- Legal Topics
- ['development Application Refusal Appeal' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties' 'residential Flat Buildings' 'costs Thrown Away by Amended Development Application']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Refusal of Development Application No. 0145/15 / Final Orders Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the proceedings should be disposed of in accordance with the parties' agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether development consent should be granted for Development Application No. 0145/15 subject to conditions.']
Ratio Decidendi
Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the proceedings were required to be disposed of in accordance with that agreement, by upholding the appeal and granting development consent subject to conditions.
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Orders
- ['The Applicant is given leave to amend the development application by substituting the plans listed in the orders as the plans relied upon for the purpose of the development application.' 'The Applicant is to pay those costs of the Respondent thrown away as a result of amending the development application pursuant...
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