JDA Jannali Holdings Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2019] NSWLEC 1303

JDA Jannali Holdings Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2019] NSWLEC 1303

The appeal is upheld and the modification application is approved because the parties reached agreement following a conciliation conference, the modified development is substantially the same as originally approved, and the decision is one the Court can properly make under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Parties
Applicant: JDA Jannali Holdings Pty Ltd; Respondent: Sutherland Shire Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal / Post Conciliation Conference, Final Orders
Outcome
Appeal upheld; modification granted
Legal Topics
Modification Application, Development Consent, Conciliation Conference, Appeal
Environmental Law Planning Law Modification Application Development Consent Conciliation Conference Appeal

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JDA Jannali Holdings Pty Ltd

Applicant

Sutherland Shire Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Appeal / Post Conciliation Conference, Final Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to amend the modification application
  2. 2 Whether the modified development consent is appropriate under relevant legislation

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is upheld and the modification application is approved because the parties reached agreement following a conciliation conference, the modified development is substantially the same as originally approved, and the decision is one the Court can properly make under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; modification granted

Orders

  • The Applicant is granted leave to amend their modification application in accordance with the plans referred to in condition 1 of Annexure "A".
  • The appeal is upheld.