Luo v City of Parramatta Council (No 2) [2023] NSWLEC 1010
Development consent is granted as the Court is satisfied with the amended conditions of consent provided and agreed upon by the parties, following directions issued in the previous judgment.
Source-derived case information.
- Parties
- Applicant: Fei Luo; Respondent: City of Parramatta Council
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 24 January 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Class 1 Appeal / Final Orders After Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld; development consent granted
- Legal Topics
- Development Consent, Boarding House Development, Conditions of Consent
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Fei Luo
Applicant
City of Parramatta Council
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal / Final Orders After Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether development consent should be granted for a boarding house at 35 Simpson Street, Dundas Valley
- 2 Whether revised conditions of consent are acceptable
Ratio Decidendi
Development consent is granted as the Court is satisfied with the amended conditions of consent provided and agreed upon by the parties, following directions issued in the previous judgment.
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld; development consent granted
Orders
- The appeal is upheld.
- Development consent is granted to DA/255/2021 for the demolition of the existing structures and the construction of a four-storey boarding house comprising 25 rooms, one manger's room and basement parking on land at 35 Simpson Street, Dundas Valley, subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure A.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
5 paragraphs
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Luo v City of Parramatta Council (No 2) [2023] NSWLEC 1010 Hearing dates: 13-14 June 2022; 26 October 2022 Date of orders: 24 January 2023 Decision date: 24 January 2023 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dixon SC Decision: The Court orders: (1) The appeal is upheld. (2) Development consent is granted to DA/255/2021 for the demolition of the existing structures and the construction of a four-storey boarding house comprising 25 rooms, one manger's room and basement parking on land at 35 Simpson Street, Dundas Valley, subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure A. (3) The exhibits are returned except for A. Catchwords: APPEAL – development application – boarding house development – revised plan of management and conditions of consent – final orders made Cases Cited: Luo v City of Parramatta Council [2023] NSWLEC 1009 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Fei Luo (Applicant) City of Parramatta Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: G McKee (Solicitor) (Applicant) D Le Breton (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Solicitors: McKees Legal Solutions (Applicant) HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 2021/360939 Publication restriction: Nil
Judgment 1. On 11 January 2023, I handed down my reasons for judgment in the Class 1 appeal, Luo v City of Parramatta Council [2023] NSWLEC 1009. At [49] of Luo v City of Parramatta Council, I directed the parties to confer and amend the plan of management and their draft conditions of consent in accordance with my reasons for judgment and to provide a copy to the Court. 2. As I am satisfied having reviewed the agreed conditions provided on 20 January 2023 that they are acceptable, I now make the following orders. 3. The Court orders that: 1. The appeal is upheld. 2. Development consent is granted to DA/255/2021 for the demolition of the existing structures and the construction of a four-storey boarding house comprising 25 rooms, one manger's room and basement parking on land at 35 Simpson Street, Dundas Valley, subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure A. 3. The exhibits are returned except for A. ……………………….. S Dixon Senior Commissioner of the Court Annexure A (369779, pdf)
********** DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 24 January 2023