Centro Properties Limited v Hurstville City Council and Others [2006] NSWLEC 78

Centro Properties Limited v Hurstville City Council and Others [2006] NSWLEC 78

The Council's failure to consider a relevant draft State Environmental Planning Policy when determining the development application was a breach of s 79C(1)(a)(ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, rendering the consent invalid, notwithstanding that notification and deferred commencement condition challenges were not substantiated.

Parties
Applicant: Centro Properties Limited; First Respondent: Hurstville City Council; Second Respondent: Richard Aberline; Third Respondent: Dimitrios Tsagias; Third Respondent: Giannoula Tsagias
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of Local Government Development Consent / Final Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
Development consent declared invalid due to failure to consider draft SEPP; consequential orders made.
Legal Topics
Development Consent, Public Notification Requirements, Deferred Commencement Consent, Mandatory Considerations, Judicial Review
Planning and Environment Law Administrative Law Development Consent Public Notification Requirements Deferred Commencement Consent Mandatory Considerations Judicial Review

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 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Centro Properties Limited

Applicant

Hurstville City Council

First Respondent

Richard Aberline

Second Respondent

Dimitrios Tsagias

Third Respondent

Giannoula Tsagias

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review of Local Government Development Consent / Final Judgment at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the development was advertised development requiring specific notification under EPA Act
  2. 2 Whether the development application was notified in accordance with DCP 17 for specified development
  3. 3 Whether deferred commencement consent lacked sufficient certainty

Ratio Decidendi

The Council's failure to consider a relevant draft State Environmental Planning Policy when determining the development application was a breach of s 79C(1)(a)(ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, rendering the consent invalid, notwithstanding that notification and deferred commencement condition challenges were not substantiated.

Court Disposition

Development consent declared invalid due to failure to consider draft SEPP; consequential orders made.

Orders

  • The Development Consent No. 462-2004 granted by the first respondent to the second respondent on 2 February 2005 is declared invalid.
  • The third respondents and their successors are restrained from relying or acting upon Development Consent No. 462-2004.