CURREY v SUTHERLAND SHIRE COUNCIL and RUSSELL [2003] NSWCA 300

CURREY v SUTHERLAND SHIRE COUNCIL and RUSSELL [2003] NSWCA 300

The appeal was dismissed because the Director's delegated authority was operative, cl 25 of the Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 1993 did not bar consent for the proposed strata subdivision, the application sufficiently described the subdivision for development consent purposes, and the internal lot prohibition did not apply to the land at the time consent was granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Dismissal of a Class 4 Application Seeking a Declaration That a Development Consent Was Void and of No Effect / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['validity of Development Application' 'validity of Development Consent' 'delegation' 'dual Occupancy Housing' 'strata Subdivision' 'zoning' 'internal Lot']
['administrative Law' 'local Government' 'environmental Planning and Assessment' 'strata Subdivision'] ['validity of Development Application' 'validity of Development Consent' 'delegation' 'dual Occupancy Housing' 'strata Subdivision' 'zoning' 'internal Lot']

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

Appeal From Dismissal of a Class 4 Application Seeking a Declaration That a Development Consent Was Void and of No Effect / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Director of Environmental Services had delegated authority to determine the development application' 'Whether cl 25 of the Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 1993 precluded development consent for the strata subdivision' 'Whether the development application was so deficient as to the subdivision that it could not be characterised as a development application' 'Whether the development would be prohibited dual occupancy housing on an internal lot']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Director's delegated authority was operative, cl 25 of the Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 1993 did not bar consent for the proposed strata subdivision, the application sufficiently described the subdivision for development consent purposes, and the internal lot prohibition did not apply to the land at the time consent was granted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']