Leroma Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1590

Leroma Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1590

Because the uncontradicted planning evidence established that the proposed modified development would remain substantially the same as the approved development and the statutory prerequisites in s 4.56 had been satisfied, the parties' agreement to approve the modification was a decision the Court could have made; s 34(3) therefore required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Concerning Deemed Refusal of a S 4.56 Modification Application / Conciliation Conference Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 With Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
Appeal upheld; modification application approved subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['modification Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'substantially the Same Development' 'affordable Rental Housing' 'residential Flat Building']
['planning and Environment' 'development Consent Modification'] ['modification Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'substantially the Same Development' 'affordable Rental Housing' 'residential Flat Building']

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 Concerning Deemed Refusal of a S 4.56 Modification Application / Conciliation Conference Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 With Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the modified development was substantially the same as the development for which consent was originally granted under s 4.56(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' 'Whether the relevant requirements under s 4.56(1) and (1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 had been satisfied.' "Whether the parties' agreement was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the uncontradicted planning evidence established that the proposed modified development would remain substantially the same as the approved development and the statutory prerequisites in s 4.56 had been satisfied, the parties' agreement to approve the modification was a decision the Court could have made; s 34(3) therefore required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; modification application approved subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['Leave is granted to the Applicant to rely on the architectural plans (Issue O) prepared by Archispectrum dated 30 August 2019.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Modification Application DA/13/2017A seeking to modify Development Consent DA/13/2017 (as approved by the Court on 15 March 2018) is approved subject to the...