Boval Engineering Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council [2022] NSWLEC 1660

Boval Engineering Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council [2022] NSWLEC 1660

Because the proposed development was permissible with consent, complied with the relevant height control, had no prescribed FSR, satisfied the identified requirements of the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010, Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and applicable State Environmental Planning Policies, and the amended application was agreed to by the consent authority, the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions; accordingly, s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Application Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Development Application No. DA21/0677 approved subject to conditions; Applicant ordered to pay Respondent's costs in the amount of $1,000.
Legal Topics
['development Application Appeal' 'conciliation Conference' 'deemed Refusal' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites for Development Consent' 'costs Under S 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['development Application Appeal' 'conciliation Conference' 'deemed Refusal' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites for Development Consent' 'costs Under S 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979']

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 Development Application Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreed decision to uphold the appeal and grant development consent subject to conditions was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites for granting consent to Development Application No. DA21/0677 were satisfied.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the proposed development was permissible with consent, complied with the relevant height control, had no prescribed FSR, satisfied the identified requirements of the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010, Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and applicable State Environmental Planning Policies, and the amended application was agreed to by the consent authority, the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions; accordingly, s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Development Application No. DA21/0677 approved subject to conditions; Applicant ordered to pay Respondent's costs in the amount of $1,000.

Orders

  • ["The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs under s 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the amount of $1,000." 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development Application No. DA21/0677, for the construction of a new storage building, reconfiguration of on-site carparking, hardstand area for...