Cairich Enterprise Pty Ltd v Strathfield Municipal Council [2021] NSWLEC 1709

Cairich Enterprise Pty Ltd v Strathfield Municipal Council [2021] NSWLEC 1709

Because the parties' agreement to approve the amended development application was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, and the parties identified no jurisdictional prerequisites preventing the exercise of that function, the Court was required under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Development Application No 2020/156 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Development Application 2020/156 approved subject to conditions; applicant ordered to pay costs thrown away.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'boarding House' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites' 'costs Thrown Away by Amendment']
['planning and Environment' 'development Consent'] ['development Application' 'boarding House' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites' 'costs Thrown Away by Amendment']

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 Under S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Development Application No 2020/156 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreement to approve the amended development application 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 amended boarding house development satisfied relevant jurisdictional prerequisites and planning controls.' "Whether the applicant should pay the respondent consent authority's costs thrown away as a result of amending the development application."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties' agreement to approve the amended development application was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, and the parties identified no jurisdictional prerequisites preventing the exercise of that function, the Court was required under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Development Application 2020/156 approved subject to conditions; applicant ordered to pay costs thrown away.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the applicant is to pay the costs of the respondent consent authority that are thrown away as a result of amending the development application, in the amount of $12,000.00 payable within 14 days of these Orders being made.' 'The appeal is...