Burgess-Hoar v Randwick City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1333

Burgess-Hoar v Randwick City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1333

The Court was satisfied that the amended modification application was substantially the same as the approved development, was not integrated development, had been properly notified with no submissions, addressed the relevant planning instruments and assessment requirements, involved works within the site by the owner, and presented no jurisdictional impediments. Because the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made, the proceedings were disposed of in accordance with that agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Modification Application Da/508/2020/b / Conciliation Conference; Agreement Between the Parties; Consent Orders
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Development Consent DA/508/2020 modified by consent to Modification Application DA/508/2020/B.
Legal Topics
['modification Application' 'development Consent' 'deemed Refusal Appeal' 'conciliation Conference' 'residential Alterations and Additions' 'access, Front Fencing and Landscaping']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['modification Application' 'development Consent' 'deemed Refusal Appeal' 'conciliation Conference' 'residential Alterations and Additions' 'access, Front Fencing and Landscaping']

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 Deemed Refusal of Modification Application Da/508/2020/b / Conciliation Conference; Agreement Between the Parties; Consent Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Modification Application DA/508/2020/B satisfied the requirements of s 4.55(2) and (3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' "Whether the parties' agreement 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 there were any jurisdictional impediments to modifying Development Consent DA/508/2020 by consent.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the amended modification application was substantially the same as the approved development, was not integrated development, had been properly notified with no submissions, addressed the relevant planning instruments and assessment requirements, involved works within the site by the owner, and presented no jurisdictional impediments. Because the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made, the proceedings were disposed of in accordance with that agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Development Consent DA/508/2020 modified by consent to Modification Application DA/508/2020/B.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'Development Consent DA/508/2020 is modified by consent to Modification Application DA/508/2020/B, in the terms set out in Annexure A.' 'Development Consent DA/508/2020 is subject to the consolidated conditions as described in Annexure B.']