Landco (NSW) Pty Ltd v Camden Council [2017] NSWLEC 86

Landco (NSW) Pty Ltd v Camden Council [2017] NSWLEC 86

Because neither the parties nor the Court had seen the disputed amended plans, the Court could not determine whether they were appropriate amendments to plans already before the Court or amounted to a new development application. The experts were therefore directed to complete the joint report in accordance with the Court's directions, while making clear that any reliance on amended plans would not be authorised by inclusion in the joint report and may require a formal application under the Court's rules and practices.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal / Urgent Directions Before the Duty Judge Concerning Delay in Preparation of a Town Planning/urban Design Joint Expert Report Before the Hearing
Outcome
Directions made requiring the town planning and urban design experts to complete and file the joint report.
Legal Topics
['class 1 Development Appeals' 'joint Expert Reports' 'expert Witness Conferences' 'amended Plans' 'directions']
['planning and Environment' 'civil Procedure'] ['class 1 Development Appeals' 'joint Expert Reports' 'expert Witness Conferences' 'amended Plans' 'directions']

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 Development Appeal / Urgent Directions Before the Duty Judge Concerning Delay in Preparation of a Town Planning/urban Design Joint Expert Report Before the Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the joint expert report process had been delayed or thrown off course by the applicant's expert including amended architectural and landscape plans in draft contributions to the joint report." 'Whether an expert could rely on or attach amended plans in a joint expert report when the plans were not presently before the Court.' 'What directions should be made to require completion of the joint report before the imminent Class 1 hearing.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because neither the parties nor the Court had seen the disputed amended plans, the Court could not determine whether they were appropriate amendments to plans already before the Court or amounted to a new development application. The experts were therefore directed to complete the joint report in accordance with the Court's directions, while making clear that any reliance on amended plans would not be authorised by inclusion in the joint report and may require a formal application under the Court's rules and practices.

Court Disposition

Directions made requiring the town planning and urban design experts to complete and file the joint report.

Orders

  • ['The joint report of the town planning and urban design experts is to be filed and served by 5:00pm on 17 July 2017.' 'The joint report is to identify the matters upon which the experts agree and disagree, and the reasons for the agreement and disagreement.' "The joint report is to be prepared and organised in...