Panoyan v Ku-ring-gai Council [2025] NSWLEC 1093
The appeal was upheld because the original development control order was lawfully issued and the agreed substituted order met the statutory requirements for compliance and demolition under the EPA Act.
- Parties
- First Applicant: Antranik Panoyan; Second Applicant: Anne Panoyan; Respondent: Ku-ring-gai Council
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 20 February 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Class 1 Miscellaneous Appeal / Decision Following Conciliation Conference
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld, substituted order issued in lieu of original development control order.
- Legal Topics
- Development Consent, Unlawful Works, Secondary Dwelling, Development Control Order, Appeal Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Antranik Panoyan
First Applicant
Anne Panoyan
Second Applicant
Ku-ring-gai Council
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Miscellaneous Appeal / Decision Following Conciliation Conference
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Development Control Order No EPA0130/23 was lawfully issued
- 2 Whether works carried out breached development consent and statutory requirements
- 3 Whether substituted orders should be issued in lieu of the original development control order
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was upheld because the original development control order was lawfully issued and the agreed substituted order met the statutory requirements for compliance and demolition under the EPA Act.
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld, substituted order issued in lieu of original development control order.
Orders
- The appeal is allowed.
- Development Control Order No EPA0130/23 is substituted with the Order marked Annexure 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