Cyril Smith & Associates Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2001] NSWLEC 150

Cyril Smith & Associates Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2001] NSWLEC 150

The April plans did not convert the development application into a new development application because, although they made significant changes including reducing the number of units, changing the footprint and setbacks, reducing gross floor area, increasing landscaping, reducing carparking, adding a community shop and deleting a unit to provide a view corridor, the proposal considered overall and cumulatively remained substantially the same as the development application as previously amended.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Proceedings Concerning a Development Application / Determination of Two Notices of Motion About Whether Amended Plans Amount to a New Development Application and Whether the Applicant May Rely on the Amended Plans
Outcome
Council's question answered in favour of the applicant; applicant granted leave to rely on the amended plans; proceedings stood over to a callover.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'amended Plans' 'whether Amended Plans Constitute a New Development Application' 'environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 Cl 55']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'amended Plans' 'whether Amended Plans Constitute a New Development Application' 'environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 Cl 55']

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 Proceedings Concerning a Development Application / Determination of Two Notices of Motion About Whether Amended Plans Amount to a New Development Application and Whether the Applicant May Rely on the Amended Plans

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed amendments by Drawings Nos DA A01E - DA A20E dated 9 April 2001 and received by the council on 18 April 2001 to Development Application LD332/00 amount to a new development application.' 'Whether the applicant should be granted leave to rely on the amended plans at the hearing of the appeal.' 'Whether the comparison should be between the May 2000 plans and the April 2001 plans, or between the December 2000 amended plans and the April 2001 plans.']

Ratio Decidendi

The April plans did not convert the development application into a new development application because, although they made significant changes including reducing the number of units, changing the footprint and setbacks, reducing gross floor area, increasing landscaping, reducing carparking, adding a community shop and deleting a unit to provide a view corridor, the proposal considered overall and cumulatively remained substantially the same as the development application as previously amended.

Court Disposition

Council's question answered in favour of the applicant; applicant granted leave to rely on the amended plans; proceedings stood over to a callover.

Orders

  • ['The changes contemplated by the plans dated 9 April 2001 do not convert the development application into a new development application.' 'Leave granted to the applicant to rely upon the amended plans.' 'Proceedings stood over to a callover before the Registrar at 9.00 am on 22 June 2001.' 'The exhibits may be...