City Projects and Developments Pty Ltd v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2017] NSWLEC 1568

City Projects and Developments Pty Ltd v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2017] NSWLEC 1568

Where the court is satisfied that an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 is appropriate, it must make orders in accordance with that agreement and is not required to make a merit assessment of the original issues in dispute.

Parties
Applicant: City Projects and Developments Pty Ltd; Respondent: Canterbury-Bankstown Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Development Application Appeal / Post Conciliation Conference Orders
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to conditions; costs to respondent
Legal Topics
Development Application, Conciliation Conference, Court Orders Under S 34(3)
Planning and Environment Law Development Application Conciliation Conference Court Orders Under S 34(3)

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

City Projects and Developments Pty Ltd

Applicant

Canterbury-Bankstown Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Development Application Appeal / Post Conciliation Conference Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the parties' agreement at conciliation conference can be disposed of under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
  2. 2 Whether the amended development application should be approved

Ratio Decidendi

Where the court is satisfied that an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 is appropriate, it must make orders in accordance with that agreement and is not required to make a merit assessment of the original issues in dispute.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to conditions; costs to respondent

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld.
  • The Applicant is granted leave to amend Development Application No. DA-406/2016 and to rely on amended plans and documents as listed.