CPDM Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council [2018] NSWLEC 1448

CPDM Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council [2018] NSWLEC 1448

Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 as to terms of a decision acceptable to them, and the Commissioner was satisfied that the 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 agreed decision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal / Conciliation Conference; Final Orders by Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Development Application No. DA 0398/16 approved in accordance with Annexure "A"; clause 4.6 variation request upheld; applicant ordered to pay Council's costs thrown away.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'clause 4.6 Variation Request' 'floor Space Ratio Control' 'costs Thrown Away']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'clause 4.6 Variation Request' 'floor Space Ratio Control' '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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Development Appeal / Conciliation Conference; Final Orders by Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Court should dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether Development Application No. DA 0398/16 should be approved in accordance with Annexure "A".' 'Whether the request pursuant to clause 4.6 of the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 to vary the floor space ratio control in clause 4.4 should be upheld.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 as to terms of a decision acceptable to them, and the Commissioner was satisfied that the 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 agreed decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Development Application No. DA 0398/16 approved in accordance with Annexure "A"; clause 4.6 variation request upheld; applicant ordered to pay Council's costs thrown away.

Orders

  • ['Leave granted to the applicant to rely on the amended plans and documents listed in Schedule B Condition 1 of the conditions annexed and marked "A".' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development Application No. DA 0398/16 for stage 1 of a staged development comprising concept proposal for 43 town-houses, two new...