Minassian v Hunter’s Hill Council [2023] NSWLEC 1101

Minassian v Hunter’s Hill Council [2023] NSWLEC 1101

The Commissioner was satisfied that the relevant pre-jurisdictional requirements had been met, including permissibility in the R2 Low Density Residential zone, compliance with height and floor space ratio standards, acceptable heritage, acid sulfate soils, earthworks, river front area, contamination and BASIX matters, and that the cl 4.6 written request adequately justified the landscaped area non-compliance. Because the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, s 34(3) required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement and grant consent subject to conditions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 From Deemed Refusal of Development Application No. Da2022/0160 / Mandatory Conciliation Conference Under S 34 AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Parties Reached Agreement and Sought Orders Under S 34
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['alterations and Additions to Dwelling House' 'r2 Low Density Residential Zone' 'clause 4.6 Written Request' 'landscaped Area Development Standard' 'conciliation Agreement']
['environmental Planning and Assessment' 'development Consent' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['alterations and Additions to Dwelling House' 'r2 Low Density Residential Zone' 'clause 4.6 Written Request' 'landscaped Area Development Standard' 'conciliation Agreement']

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 Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 From Deemed Refusal of Development Application No. Da2022/0160 / Mandatory Conciliation Conference Under S 34 AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Parties Reached Agreement and Sought Orders Under S 34

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreed decision was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether the amended development application satisfied relevant jurisdictional requirements under the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012 and applicable State Environmental Planning Policies.' "Whether the Applicants' written request under cl 4.6 of the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012 justified contravention of the landscaped area standard in cl 6.9."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Commissioner was satisfied that the relevant pre-jurisdictional requirements had been met, including permissibility in the R2 Low Density Residential zone, compliance with height and floor space ratio standards, acceptable heritage, acid sulfate soils, earthworks, river front area, contamination and BASIX matters, and that the cl 4.6 written request adequately justified the landscaped area non-compliance. Because the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, s 34(3) required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement and grant consent subject to conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The Applicants are granted leave to rely upon the amended plans and documentation referred to in the index annexed hereto and marked "Annexure A".' "The Applicants' written request under clause 4.6 of the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012 prepared by Corona Projects, dated 6 March 2023, regarding the...