Khoury v Campbelltown City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1395

Khoury v Campbelltown City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1395

Because the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites were satisfied, including permissibility in the R2 Low Density Residential zone, compliance with applicable height and floor space ratio standards, consideration of heritage and other local environmental plan matters, satisfaction that contamination could be remediated under the Remedial Action Plan, and consideration of relevant child care planning requirements, 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.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal Pursuant to S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; Applicant to pay Respondent's thrown away costs resulting from the Amended Application as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
['development Appeal' 'centre Based Child Care Centre' 'remediation of Land' 'conciliation Conference' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites for Consent']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent'] ['development Appeal' 'centre Based Child Care Centre' 'remediation of Land' 'conciliation Conference' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites for Consent']

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 Appeal Pursuant to S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreed decision 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 jurisdictional prerequisites for granting development consent to development application 1655/2022/DA-C were satisfied.' 'Whether the Site could be made suitable for the proposed child care centre use having regard to contamination and the Remedial Action Plan.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites were satisfied, including permissibility in the R2 Low Density Residential zone, compliance with applicable height and floor space ratio standards, consideration of heritage and other local environmental plan matters, satisfaction that contamination could be remediated under the Remedial Action Plan, and consideration of relevant child care planning requirements, 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.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; Applicant to pay Respondent's thrown away costs resulting from the Amended Application as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Applicant is to pay those costs of the Respondent that have been thrown away as a result of the Amended Application as agreed or assessed.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development application 1655/2022/DA-C for the consolidation of Lot 8...