Lippman v Burwood Council (No. 2) [2007] NSWLEC 204

Lippman v Burwood Council (No. 2) [2007] NSWLEC 204

It is unreasonable to impose the s 94 contribution in this case because the subject site and use do not fall within the residential or commercial categories specified in the contributions plan, the proposed use does not significantly increase traffic, and the contributions plan was not intended to require contributions from this type of development in this location.

Parties
Applicant: Ed Lippman; Respondent: Burwood Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Development Application Appeal / Post Hearing Determination of Conditions of Consent
Outcome
Condition requiring s 94 contribution deleted
Legal Topics
Section 94 Contributions, Development Consent Conditions, Reasonableness of Planning Contributions
Planning Law Section 94 Contributions Development Consent Conditions Reasonableness of Planning Contributions

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ed Lippman

Applicant

Burwood Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Development Application Appeal / Post Hearing Determination of Conditions of Consent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is reasonable to impose a Section 94 contribution for road and traffic facilities on the proposed development
  2. 2 Whether the Section 94 Contributions Plan applies to the applicant's development

Ratio Decidendi

It is unreasonable to impose the s 94 contribution in this case because the subject site and use do not fall within the residential or commercial categories specified in the contributions plan, the proposed use does not significantly increase traffic, and the contributions plan was not intended to require contributions from this type of development in this location.

Court Disposition

Condition requiring s 94 contribution deleted

Orders

  • The Section 94 contribution condition requiring payment of $104,120 is deleted.