Cavcorp Australia Pty Ltd v Hunters Hill Council (No 2) [2021] NSWLEC 1746

Cavcorp Australia Pty Ltd v Hunters Hill Council (No 2) [2021] NSWLEC 1746

The disputed conditions should be resolved by making targeted amendments that implement the first judgment without imposing unnecessarily broad prohibitions: the schedules should be completed, the northern landscaped area conditions should allow an exempt development shed in a specified location and avoid extravagant prohibitions, the revised door and other agreed condition wording should be adopted, Hebel power panels are acceptable for the landing, the Murraya hedge need not be removed, and no work outside the site boundary is approved.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Modification Application / Dispute Over Amended Plans and Conditions Following Earlier Judgment on Modification Application
Outcome
Direction made; final orders to be made after Council files conditions.
Legal Topics
['modification Application' 'development Consent Conditions' 'unlawful Building Work' 'landscaping Conditions' 'exempt Development' 'easement for Services']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent Modification'] ['modification Application' 'development Consent Conditions' 'unlawful Building Work' 'landscaping Conditions' 'exempt Development' 'easement for Services']

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 Modification Application / Dispute Over Amended Plans and Conditions Following Earlier Judgment on Modification Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the amended modification application and proposed conditions properly reflected the findings in the first judgment or were otherwise appropriate.' 'Whether conditions should absolutely prohibit a garden shed or other objects in the landscaped northern area of the site.' 'Whether the proposed Hebel power panels for the landing were acceptable.' 'Whether the existing Murraya screen needed to be removed.' 'Whether the consent as proposed to be modified approved work outside the boundary of the site.']

Ratio Decidendi

The disputed conditions should be resolved by making targeted amendments that implement the first judgment without imposing unnecessarily broad prohibitions: the schedules should be completed, the northern landscaped area conditions should allow an exempt development shed in a specified location and avoid extravagant prohibitions, the revised door and other agreed condition wording should be adopted, Hebel power panels are acceptable for the landing, the Murraya hedge need not be removed, and no work outside the site boundary is approved.

Court Disposition

Direction made; final orders to be made after Council files conditions.

Orders

  • ['The Council is to file within 2 days conditions of the approval of the modification application and the modified consent in accordance with this judgment.']