Hong Hang v Holroyd City Council [2006] NSWLEC 804

Hong Hang v Holroyd City Council [2006] NSWLEC 804

The plans submitted with the section 96 modification application did not provide sufficient detail to demonstrate that the Building Code of Australia requirements, specifically for disabled access, could be complied with. The Court was not satisfied that the modification works were properly detailed or workable, and therefore dismissed the appeal.

Parties
Applicant: Hong Hang; Respondent: Holroyd City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 December 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal (section 96 Modification) / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; section 96 modification application refused
Legal Topics
Development Application, Section 96 Modification, Deferred Commencement Conditions, Drainage, Disabled Access, Building Code of Australia (bca)
Planning and Environment Development Application Section 96 Modification Deferred Commencement Conditions Drainage Disabled Access Building Code of Australia (bca)

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

Hong Hang

Applicant

Holroyd City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (section 96 Modification) / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the section 96 modification should be granted given compliance with deferred commencement conditions, provision of stormwater drainage, and disabled access requirements under the BCA.

Ratio Decidendi

The plans submitted with the section 96 modification application did not provide sufficient detail to demonstrate that the Building Code of Australia requirements, specifically for disabled access, could be complied with. The Court was not satisfied that the modification works were properly detailed or workable, and therefore dismissed the appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; section 96 modification application refused

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The section 96 Modification application is refused.