Blackmore Design Group Limited v Manly Council [2014] NSWLEC 151

Blackmore Design Group Limited v Manly Council [2014] NSWLEC 151

The Court determined that an order for hearing and determination of the separate question should be made, as doing so would likely result in substantial savings of time and expense, in conformity with s 56A of the Civil Procedure Act 2005, and that opposition raised by Blackmore regarding existing use rights and the amendment application did not justify departure from the orthodox approach where the central issue is suitable for separate determination.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application (class 1) / Determination of Notice of Motion for Separate Question
Outcome
Order made for separate hearing and determination of the specified question.
Legal Topics
['determination of Separate Question' "characterisation of 'shop Top Housing'" 'permissibility Under Local Environmental Plan']
['planning and Environment Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['determination of Separate Question' "characterisation of 'shop Top Housing'" 'permissibility Under Local Environmental Plan']

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

Interlocutory Application (class 1) / Determination of Notice of Motion for Separate Question

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the development application seeks consent for 'residential accommodation' that is not 'shop top housing' and is therefore prohibited in Zone B2 under the Manly Local Environmental Plan 2013" 'Whether the Court should order the hearing of a separate question in this context']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court determined that an order for hearing and determination of the separate question should be made, as doing so would likely result in substantial savings of time and expense, in conformity with s 56A of the Civil Procedure Act 2005, and that opposition raised by Blackmore regarding existing use rights and the amendment application did not justify departure from the orthodox approach where the central issue is suitable for separate determination.

Court Disposition

Order made for separate hearing and determination of the specified question.

Orders

  • ["Order 1 of the council's notice of motion filed 3 September 2014 is made: that the Court separate and determine the question whether the development application seeks consent for 'residential accommodation' which cannot be characterised as 'shop top housing' and is therefore prohibited on land within Zone B2 -...