Havenland Pty Ltd v Blue Mountains City Council [2000] NSWLEC 13

Havenland Pty Ltd v Blue Mountains City Council [2000] NSWLEC 13

The modifications were granted because the evidence showed that Condition 16 had never been fulfilled, the residents were largely of modest or pensioner means, they were otherwise reasonably catered for, and it would not be reasonable in the existing circumstances to require management to provide the services originally imposed. The same reasoning supported acceptance of the reduced substitute obligation in proposed Condition 17, and the proposed Condition 14 was accepted as a substitute emergency alarm system condition.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 November 1999
Procedural Posture
Development Consent Modification / Amended Notice of Motion Seeking Court Approval to Modify Development Consent
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
['modification of Development Consent' 'conditions of Consent' "aged Persons' Housing Development" 'emergency Alarm System' 'central Amenities Building and Resident Services']

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 Consent Modification / Amended Notice of Motion Seeking Court Approval to Modify Development Consent

  1. 1 ["Whether the Court should approve modifications to Conditions 14, 16 and 17 of the 1983 development consent for an aged persons' residential development at Lalor Drive, Springwood." 'Whether Condition 16, requiring a kiosk or shop and provision of one full meal per day at reasonable cost to residents requiring it because of sickness or disability, should be deleted in light of existing circumstances.' 'Whether a reduced substitute obligation under proposed new Condition 17 was appropriate in the circumstances.']

Ratio Decidendi

The modifications were granted because the evidence showed that Condition 16 had never been fulfilled, the residents were largely of modest or pensioner means, they were otherwise reasonably catered for, and it would not be reasonable in the existing circumstances to require management to provide the services originally imposed. The same reasoning supported acceptance of the reduced substitute obligation in proposed Condition 17, and the proposed Condition 14 was accepted as a substitute emergency alarm system condition.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • ['The modifications sought in the amended Notice of Motion filed in Court were granted.' 'The exhibits tendered in support of the application shall remain on the Court file.']