Innovate Architects Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2020] NSWLEC 1629

Innovate Architects Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2020] NSWLEC 1629

Because the amended development was permissible with consent, the cl 4.6 request justified the minor contravention of the height of buildings standard, the relevant SEPP and statutory matters were satisfactorily addressed, and the parties' agreement was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the Court was required by s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Development Application Da18/0349 / Orders Following Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted to DA18/0349, as amended, subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['mixed Use Development' 'clause 4.6 Variation to Height of Buildings Development Standard' 'conciliation Conference' 'development Application Appeal' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites for Consent']
['environmental Planning and Assessment' 'land and Environment' 'development Consent'] ['mixed Use Development' 'clause 4.6 Variation to Height of Buildings Development Standard' 'conciliation Conference' 'development Application Appeal' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites for Consent']

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(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Development Application Da18/0349 / Orders Following Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreement 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 jurisdictional prerequisites for granting development consent to DA18/0349, as amended, were satisfied.' 'Whether the written request under cl 4.6 of Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 justified contravention of the cl 4.3 height of buildings development standard.' 'Whether relevant statutory instruments, including SEPP 55, SEPP 65, the BASIX SEPP and the Draft Coastal SEPP, were satisfactorily addressed.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the amended development was permissible with consent, the cl 4.6 request justified the minor contravention of the height of buildings standard, the relevant SEPP and statutory matters were satisfactorily addressed, and the parties' agreement was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the Court was required by s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted to DA18/0349, as amended, subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['Leave is granted to the applicant to amend development application DA18/0349 to rely on the amended plans and materials specified in the orders.' "The applicant shall pay the respondent's costs pursuant to s 8.15(3) Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the agreed sum of $20,000 on or before 18...