Estate Project Developments Pty Ltd v City of Sydney Council [2005] NSWLEC 312

Estate Project Developments Pty Ltd v City of Sydney Council [2005] NSWLEC 312

The present matter was not relevantly different from Claude Neon because the applicant sought development consent for land including small sections of public roadway and sought only the Court's exercise of the Council's function as owner for the limited purpose of considering whether development consent should be granted. The Court was not being asked to exercise the Council's powers of disposition or to close or convey the road. Accordingly, under s 39(2) the Court may receive and consider the appeal, and if development consent is granted the Council's consent to the making of the application will be given by the Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 June 2005
Procedural Posture
Development Application Appeal; Question of Law / Question Whether Development Application No. U 04 00259 Was Validly Made Before Hearing and Determination of the Appeal
Outcome
The Court held that the appeal lodged with the Court may be heard and determined; counsel were invited to address the appropriate form of orders.
Legal Topics
['development Application Validity' "owner's Consent for Public Road Land" 'land and Environment Court Powers on Appeal' 'closure of Public Road' 'section 39(2) Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (nsw)']
['planning and Environment Law' 'local Government Law' 'roads Law'] ['development Application Validity' "owner's Consent for Public Road Land" 'land and Environment Court Powers on Appeal' 'closure of Public Road' 'section 39(2) Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (nsw)']

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

Development Application Appeal; Question of Law / Question Whether Development Application No. U 04 00259 Was Validly Made Before Hearing and Determination of the Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether development application No. U-04-00259 was validly made where it included small sections of a public road and Council had not consented as owner under cl 49(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (NSW).' "Whether the Court may exercise the Council's function of giving owner's consent under s 39(2) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW)." 'Whether Sydney City Council v Claude Neon Ltd should be distinguished because the Roads Act 1993 now governs public roads and road closure.']

Ratio Decidendi

The present matter was not relevantly different from Claude Neon because the applicant sought development consent for land including small sections of public roadway and sought only the Court's exercise of the Council's function as owner for the limited purpose of considering whether development consent should be granted. The Court was not being asked to exercise the Council's powers of disposition or to close or convey the road. Accordingly, under s 39(2) the Court may receive and consider the appeal, and if development consent is granted the Council's consent to the making of the application will be given by the Court.

Court Disposition

The Court held that the appeal lodged with the Court may be heard and determined; counsel were invited to address the appropriate form of orders.

Orders

  • ['Counsel invited to address the Court as to the appropriate form of any orders.']