Salman & Ertas v Holroyd City Council [2006] NSWLEC 358

Salman & Ertas v Holroyd City Council [2006] NSWLEC 358

The appeals are to be dismissed due to the applicants' inability or unwillingness to present final plans within a reasonable period, resulting in failure to comply with the Court's directions and undertakings necessary to determine the matters.

Parties
Applicant: George Salman; Applicant: George Ertas; Respondent: Holroyd City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Development Appeals / Judgment
Outcome
appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Development Application, Dual Occupancy, Subdivision, Lot Sizes, Overdevelopment, Amenity
Planning Law Development Application Dual Occupancy Subdivision Lot Sizes Overdevelopment Amenity

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Salman

Applicant

George Ertas

Applicant

Holroyd City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Development Appeals / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 failure to file and serve final plans for approval
  2. 2 dismissal of appeals due to applicant inaction

Ratio Decidendi

The appeals are to be dismissed due to the applicants' inability or unwillingness to present final plans within a reasonable period, resulting in failure to comply with the Court's directions and undertakings necessary to determine the matters.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed

Orders

  • The appeals are dismissed.
  • The exhibits may be returned except for Exhibits C.