Eastview (Australia) Pty Limited v Blacktown City Council [2021] NSWLEC 1792

Eastview (Australia) Pty Limited v Blacktown City Council [2021] NSWLEC 1792

Because the parties reached an agreement that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the amended development application was permissible with consent in the B4 Mixed Use zone, relevant jurisdictional prerequisites and planning instruments were adequately addressed, and the cl 4.6 written...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application SPP 21 00002 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted to the amended Development Application SPP-21-00002 subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'mixed Use Development' 'clause 4.6 Written Request' 'height of Buildings Development Standard' 'section 34 Conciliation' 'costs Thrown Away']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent' 'land and Environment Court Class 1 Jurisdiction'] ['development Application' 'mixed Use Development' 'clause 4.6 Written Request' 'height of Buildings Development Standard' 'section 34 Conciliation' 'costs Thrown Away']

Source-derived case record

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 Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application SPP 21 00002 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Court could dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether the amended development application satisfied the jurisdictional prerequisites for the grant of development consent under s 4.16 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' "Whether the Applicant's clause 4.6 written request adequately justified contravention of the cl 4.3 height of buildings development standard in Blacktown Local Environmental Plan 2015." 'Whether relevant provisions of Blacktown Local Environmental Plan 2015 and applicable State Environmental Planning Policies had been adequately addressed.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties reached an agreement that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the amended development application was permissible with consent in the B4 Mixed Use zone, relevant jurisdictional prerequisites and planning instruments were adequately addressed, and the cl 4.6 written request adequately justified the 4.87m height exceedance with no material environmental impacts or additional overshadowing, the appeal was upheld and development consent was granted subject to conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted to the amended Development Application SPP-21-00002 subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['Leave is granted to the Applicant to amend Development Application SPP-21-00002 and rely on the amended architectural plans listed at condition 2.1.1 of Annexure A.' "Pursuant to Section 8.15(3) of the EPA Act, the Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs thrown away as a result of amending the Development...