Combined Projects (Hurstville) Pty Ltd v Georges River Council [2017] NSWLEC 1528

Combined Projects (Hurstville) Pty Ltd v Georges River Council [2017] NSWLEC 1528

Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the Court was required to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement by upholding the appeal and approving the development application subject to conditions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Final Orders After Conciliation Conference
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Under S 34(3)' 'development Consent']
['planning and Development Law'] ['development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Under S 34(3)' 'development Consent']

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Final Orders After Conciliation Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the agreement reached between the parties under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.' "Whether the proceedings should be disposed of in accordance with the parties' agreement."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the Court was required to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement by upholding the appeal and approving the development application subject to conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The Applicant is granted leave to rely upon the amended plans and documents referred to in the conditions of consent annexed hereto and marked "Annexure A".' 'The Appeal is upheld.' 'Development application no. DA-2016/154, for the construction of an additional two storeys atop of Building D of the mixed use...