Group Architects Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2023] NSWLEC 1277

Group Architects Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2023] NSWLEC 1277

The Court approved the modification application because the parties had reached an agreed decision under s 34, and the Commissioner was satisfied that the jurisdictional requirements for exercising the s 4.55 modification power were met: the modified development was substantially the same as the approved development, required notification and consultation had occurred, the single objecting submission had been considered, relevant s 4.15 matters and the reasons for the original Court-granted consent had been considered, and the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Modification Application Under S 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Orders Made Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Modification application approved; Development Consent No. DA399/2021 modified.
Legal Topics
['modification of Development Consent' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'jurisdictional Pre Requisites for Modification Application' 'substantially the Same Development']
['environmental Planning and Assessment' 'land and Environment'] ['modification of Development Consent' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'jurisdictional Pre Requisites for Modification Application' 'substantially the Same Development']

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

Class 1 Modification Application Under S 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Orders Made Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed modified development is substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted under s 4.55(2)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' 'Whether notification, consultation and consideration of submissions requirements under s 4.55(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 were satisfied.' 'Whether relevant matters under s 4.15(1) and the reasons for the original consent were considered as required by s 4.55(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' "Whether the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court approved the modification application because the parties had reached an agreed decision under s 34, and the Commissioner was satisfied that the jurisdictional requirements for exercising the s 4.55 modification power were met: the modified development was substantially the same as the approved development, required notification and consultation had occurred, the single objecting submission had been considered, relevant s 4.15 matters and the reasons for the original Court-granted consent had been considered, and the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.

Court Disposition

Modification application approved; Development Consent No. DA399/2021 modified.

Orders

  • ['The modification application is approved.' 'Development Consent No. DA399/2021 is modified in the terms in Annexure A.' 'As a consequence of Order (2), Development Consent No. DA399/2021 is subject to the consolidated, modified conditions of consent set out in Annexure B.']