Murphy v Woollahra Municipal Council [2008] NSWLEC 1431
The proposed amendment to condition 3A does not cause any substantive environmental impact, the development remains substantially the same as previously approved, and nothing in the applicable statutes or development control plans prohibits or is adverse to approval; therefore, the consent orders for modification should be granted.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 14 October 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Class 1 Application / Judgment on S 96 Modification Application
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed by consent
- Legal Topics
- ['modification of Development Consent' 'heritage' 'environmental Impact' 'development Control Plan']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Application / Judgment on S 96 Modification Application
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether amendment to condition 3A of development consent should be allowed under s 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979' 'Whether the environmental and heritage impacts are acceptable']
Ratio Decidendi
The proposed amendment to condition 3A does not cause any substantive environmental impact, the development remains substantially the same as previously approved, and nothing in the applicable statutes or development control plans prohibits or is adverse to approval; therefore, the consent orders for modification should be granted.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed by consent
Orders
- ['The appeal be allowed.' 'The conditions of development consent DA 790/2007/1 in respect of the development at 12 Stafford Street Paddington be amended by way of deletion of condition C3(a) and insertion of a new condition C3(a) as specified.' 'The exhibits are returned to all parties except Exhibits A,B and 2.']
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