Ingleburn 143 Pty Ltd v Camden Council [2021] NSWLEC 1557

Ingleburn 143 Pty Ltd v Camden Council [2021] NSWLEC 1557

The Court was satisfied, on the agreed statement of jurisdictional requirements and the parties' reasons, that the jurisdictional prerequisites were satisfied and that the parties' agreed decision to uphold the appeal and grant development consent subject to conditions was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. Section 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 therefore required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreed decision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal Pursuant to S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Development Application Da2020/10521/1 / Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Parties Reached Agreement and the Court Made Orders
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development application DA2020/10521/1 approved subject to conditions; applicant ordered to pay respondent's costs thrown away.
Legal Topics
['subdivision' 'remediation of Contaminated Land' 'development Consent' 'conciliation Conference' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites' 'costs Thrown Away']
['planning and Environment' 'development Application Appeal' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['subdivision' 'remediation of Contaminated Land' 'development Consent' 'conciliation Conference' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites' 'costs Thrown Away']

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 Development Appeal Pursuant to S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Development Application Da2020/10521/1 / Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Parties Reached Agreement and the Court Made Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appeal against refusal of development application DA2020/10521/1 should be upheld and development consent granted subject to conditions.' "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 relevant jurisdictional prerequisites for granting development consent were satisfied, including owner consent, permissibility under the Camden Growth Centres Precinct Plan, public utility infrastructure arrangements, notification, bushfire safety authority, Aboriginal heritage requirements, contaminated land remediation, Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20 requirements, and the Camden Growth Centre Precincts Development Control Plan 2013.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied, on the agreed statement of jurisdictional requirements and the parties' reasons, that the jurisdictional prerequisites were satisfied and that the parties' agreed decision to uphold the appeal and grant development consent subject to conditions was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. Section 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 therefore required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreed decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development application DA2020/10521/1 approved subject to conditions; applicant ordered to pay respondent's costs thrown away.

Orders

  • ["The applicant is to pay the respondent's costs thrown away under section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the amount of $7,000 within 28 days of the orders disposing of these proceedings." 'The appeal in respect of the two properties known as Lot 11 in DP629130 and part of Lot 100...