Richardson v City of Canada Bay Council [2020] NSWLEC 1481

Richardson v City of Canada Bay Council [2020] NSWLEC 1481

Because the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites had been addressed and satisfied, and the parties' agreed decision to uphold the appeal and grant consent subject to conditions was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application Da2020/0047 / Conciliation Conference Under S 34 AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Agreement Between the Parties; Orders Made
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'deemed Refusal Appeal' 'conciliation Conference' 'consent Orders' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites' 'secondary Dwelling' 'basix' 'remediation of Land']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'deemed Refusal Appeal' 'conciliation Conference' 'consent Orders' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites' 'secondary Dwelling' 'basix' 'remediation of Land']

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 Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application Da2020/0047 / Conciliation Conference Under S 34 AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Agreement Between the Parties; Orders Made

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreed decision was a decision that 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 under s 4.16 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 were satisfied.' 'Whether the appeal should be upheld and development consent granted subject to conditions.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites had been addressed and satisfied, and the parties' agreed decision to uphold the appeal and grant consent subject to conditions was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['Leave is granted to the applicant to further amend the development application by relying on the listed documents prepared by Derek Raithby Architecture, including further amended architectural plans dated September 2020 and BASIX certificate 1130803s dated 2ND October 2020.' 'No order as to costs.' 'The appeal is...