Jam Pad Investments Pty Ltd v Central Coast Council [2023] NSWLEC 1455
The substitution of the development control Order with a Repair Order is permissible under s 8.18(4)(c) of EPA Act, and justified due to the likelihood of danger posed by the current condition of certain works, in accordance with statutory authority and the agreement reached at conciliation conference.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 16 August 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Disposal Following Conciliation Conference
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld; development control order substituted with an amended order (Order No. 5, Annexure A)
- Legal Topics
- ['development Control Order' 'restore Works Order' 'repair Order' 'unauthorised Works' 'conciliation Conference']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Disposal Following Conciliation Conference
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the development control order should be upheld or substituted with a repair order' 'Whether the substituted repair order is appropriate given the circumstances']
Ratio Decidendi
The substitution of the development control Order with a Repair Order is permissible under s 8.18(4)(c) of EPA Act, and justified due to the likelihood of danger posed by the current condition of certain works, in accordance with statutory authority and the agreement reached at conciliation conference.
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld; development control order substituted with an amended order (Order No. 5, Annexure A)
Orders
- ['Appeal is upheld.' "Development control Order No. 10 issued by Central Coast Council on 28 June 2022 is substituted with the amended Order No. 5 annexed hereto and marked 'A'."]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment