Succar & anor v Georges River Council [2016] NSWLEC 1246

Succar & anor v Georges River Council [2016] NSWLEC 1246

Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the proceedings were disposed of in accordance with that agreement without a merits assessment of the issues originally in dispute.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Conciliation Conference; Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'development Consent' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'section 34 Orders']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'development Consent' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'section 34 Orders']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Conciliation Conference; Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the parties had reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 as to terms of a decision acceptable to them.' 'Whether the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the proceedings were disposed of in accordance with that agreement without a merits assessment of the issues originally in dispute.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' "Development consent is granted to DA 2015/0129 for the proposed dual occupancy development at 8 Cooloongatta Road, Beverly Hills (being folio identifier 224/13496) subject to the conditions set out in Annexure 'A'." "A copy of the plans referred to in condition 1 of Annexure 'A' are...