McKenzie v Blue Mountains City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1459

McKenzie v Blue Mountains City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1459

Because the amended plans and conditions resolved the contentions to the parties' satisfaction, the proposal was permissible and not inconsistent with the relevant zone objectives or development standards, the BMDCP requirements were complied with, and there were no jurisdictional impediments, the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions and the proceedings had to be disposed of in accordance with that agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Partial Refusal of Development Application X/851/2018 / Conciliation Conference; Agreement Between the Parties; Final Orders
Outcome
Appeal upheld; the refused part of Development Application No. X/851/2018 relating to the garage/shed and attached carport was approved subject to conditions of consent.
Legal Topics
['development Application Appeal' 'conciliation Conference' 'development Consent' 'garage and Carport Development' 'local Environmental Plan and Development Control Plan Compliance']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application Appeal' 'conciliation Conference' 'development Consent' 'garage and Carport Development' 'local Environmental Plan and Development Control Plan Compliance']

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 Against Partial Refusal of Development Application X/851/2018 / Conciliation Conference; Agreement Between the Parties; Final Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Court should dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether the amended development proposal satisfied the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites under s 4.15(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' 'Whether consent should be granted to the refused part of Development Application X/851/2018 for the garage/shed and attached carport.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the amended plans and conditions resolved the contentions to the parties' satisfaction, the proposal was permissible and not inconsistent with the relevant zone objectives or development standards, the BMDCP requirements were complied with, and there were no jurisdictional impediments, the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions and the proceedings had to be disposed of in accordance with that agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; the refused part of Development Application No. X/851/2018 relating to the garage/shed and attached carport was approved subject to conditions of consent.

Orders

  • ['The Applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended plans and documentation identified in the orders.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'That part of Development Application No. X/851/2018 which relates to the construction of a garage/shed containing car parking spaces, a home gym, art studio, workbench, storage and an...