Kostantopoulos v Georges River Council [2019] NSWLEC 1611

Kostantopoulos v Georges River Council [2019] NSWLEC 1611

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 grant of development consent to the amended application subject to conditions was a decision the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions, the proceedings were disposed of in accordance with that agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Application Deemed Refusal Appeal / Conciliation Conference; Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'childcare Centre Facility' 'conciliation Conference' 'development Consent' 'costs Thrown Away']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'childcare Centre Facility' 'conciliation Conference' 'development Consent' 'costs Thrown Away']

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 Development Application Deemed Refusal Appeal / Conciliation Conference; Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted for the Applicant to rely on amended plans and material.' 'Whether the Court could grant development consent to the amended development application subject to conditions following an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.' 'Whether jurisdictional preconditions for the grant of consent were satisfied.']

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 grant of development consent to the amended application subject to conditions was a decision the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions, the proceedings were disposed of in accordance with that agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['Leave is granted for the Applicant to rely on the amended plans and material listed in paragraph 1 of the conditions set out in Annexure A.' "The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs thrown away as a result of the Applicant amending the application as agreed or assessed, pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the...