Dipalo v Liverpool City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1147

The presiding Commissioner was satisfied that the agreement reached between the parties at or after the conciliation conference was one that the Court could have made, and therefore, disposed of the proceedings in accordance with the agreement as required by s 34(3) of the Act.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 21 April 2016
Procedural Posture: Development Application Subdivision / Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome: Proceedings disposed in accordance with the agreement between the parties under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Legal Topics: ['subdivision' 'development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties']

['planning and Environment Law'] ['subdivision' 'development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1

Procedural Posture

Development Application Subdivision / Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the agreement reached by the parties under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 was one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Proceedings disposed in accordance with the agreement between the parties under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Orders

['Orders made to give effect to the agreement between the parties; see attached orders for terms']