KVP Industries Pty Ltd v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2021] NSWLEC 1297

KVP Industries Pty Ltd v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2021] NSWLEC 1297

The Court upheld the appeal and modified the development consent because the parties agreed, and the Court accepted, that the proposed modification would be substantially the same development as the original consent, the proposal satisfied the relevant planning instruments and regulatory requirements, the agreed conditions were lawful, and the agreement was one the Court could give effect to under s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.9 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Modification Application DA 393/2013/d / Conciliation Conference; Agreement Between the Parties; Final Orders
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Development Consent No. DA-393/2013 modified.
Legal Topics
['modification Application' 'development Consent' 'shop Top Housing' 'conciliation Conference' 'substantially the Same Development' 'conditions of Consent']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['modification Application' 'development Consent' 'shop Top Housing' 'conciliation Conference' 'substantially the Same Development' 'conditions of Consent']

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

Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.9 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Modification Application DA 393/2013/d / Conciliation Conference; Agreement Between the Parties; Final Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted for the applicant to rely on amended plans and documents.' 'Whether the development as modified would be substantially the same development as originally approved under s 4.55(2)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' 'Whether the relevant provisions of environmental planning instruments and regulations were satisfied.' "Whether the agreed conditions of consent were lawful and orders reflecting the parties' agreement should be made."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court upheld the appeal and modified the development consent because the parties agreed, and the Court accepted, that the proposed modification would be substantially the same development as the original consent, the proposal satisfied the relevant planning instruments and regulatory requirements, the agreed conditions were lawful, and the agreement was one the Court could give effect to under s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Development Consent No. DA-393/2013 modified.

Orders

  • ['Leave is granted for the applicant to rely on amended plans and documents referred to as Annexure CN-1 of the affidavit of Mr Christopher Nehme sworn 25 May 2021.' 'The applicant is to pay the respondent $3,000 pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' 'The appeal is...