Deemay Enterprises Pty Limited v Port Stephens Council [2020] NSWLEC 1613
It was appropriate to uphold the appeal and modify the development control order to require the removal of the six dwellings in the APZ by 31 March 2021, in accordance with the agreement between the parties and in the public interest to ensure unauthorised structures were removed in a timely manner.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 08 December 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Final Orders
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld; development control order modified
- Legal Topics
- ['development Control Orders' 'modification of Development Orders' 'unauthorised Structures' 'asset Protection Zones (apz)']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the development control order issued by the Council should be modified under s 8.18(4)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979' 'Whether the removal of unauthorised dwellings situated in the asset protection zone (APZ) is appropriate under the circumstances']
Ratio Decidendi
It was appropriate to uphold the appeal and modify the development control order to require the removal of the six dwellings in the APZ by 31 March 2021, in accordance with the agreement between the parties and in the public interest to ensure unauthorised structures were removed in a timely manner.
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld; development control order modified
Orders
- ['The appeal is upheld.' 'The Order dated 26 August 2019 is modified pursuant to s 8.18(4)(b) to require the removal of the six dwellings numbered 75 to 80 situated in the APZ and adjacent to the southern boundary of Lot 175 DP 753204, 530 Gan Gan Road One Mile by 31 March 2021.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment