Centro Properties Limited v Warringah Council & Anor [2003] NSWLEC 145

Centro Properties Limited v Warringah Council & Anor [2003] NSWLEC 145

The Council failed to take into account economic impact in the locality as required by s 79C(1)(b) of the EP&A Act, which was a mandatory relevant consideration in the context of an unusually large development; this failure invalidated the consent. The Council did, however, satisfy the conditions precedent relating to consistency with desired future character under cl 12(3)(b) and cl 20(1), and those were not jurisdictional facts in the narrow sense.

Parties
Applicant: Centro Properties Limited; First Respondent: Warringah Council; Second Respondent: Cornerstone Property Group Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Judicial Review Proceedings / Judgment on Substantive Issues; No Formal Orders Yet Made
Outcome
Applicant successful on argument 2 (failure to consider economic impact); no declarations or orders made, as further submissions invited.
Legal Topics
Development Consent, Judicial Review, Failure to Consider Mandatory Relevant Consideration, Interpretation of Local Environmental Plans
Administrative Law Planning and Environment Law Development Consent Judicial Review Failure to Consider Mandatory Relevant Consideration Interpretation of Local Environmental Plans

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 4 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Centro Properties Limited

Applicant

Warringah Council

First Respondent

Cornerstone Property Group Pty Ltd

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Class 4 Judicial Review Proceedings / Judgment on Substantive Issues; No Formal Orders Yet Made

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Council satisfied conditions precedent under cl 12(3)(b) and cl 20(1) of the Warringah Local Environmental Plan 2000 before granting consent; whether cl 20(1) creates a jurisdictional fact; whether the Council failed to consider economic impact in the locality as required by s 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Ratio Decidendi

The Council failed to take into account economic impact in the locality as required by s 79C(1)(b) of the EP&A Act, which was a mandatory relevant consideration in the context of an unusually large development; this failure invalidated the consent. The Council did, however, satisfy the conditions precedent relating to consistency with desired future character under cl 12(3)(b) and cl 20(1), and those were not jurisdictional facts in the narrow sense.

Court Disposition

Applicant successful on argument 2 (failure to consider economic impact); no declarations or orders made, as further submissions invited.