Mackenzie Architects International Pty Ltd v Canterbury- Bankstown Council [2017] NSWLEC 1084

Mackenzie Architects International Pty Ltd v Canterbury- Bankstown Council [2017] NSWLEC 1084

Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the proceedings were disposed of in accordance with that agreement without a merit assessment of the original dispute.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal / Orders Following Conciliation Conference Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; applicant to pay respondent's costs as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties' 'development Consent' 'costs']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties' 'development Consent' 'costs']

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 / Orders Following Conciliation Conference Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the agreement reached between the parties under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 should be given effect by orders of the Court.' 'Whether the decision agreed by the parties was one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the proceedings were disposed of in accordance with that agreement without a merit assessment of the original dispute.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; applicant to pay respondent's costs as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • ['Leave is granted to the Applicant to rely on the amended plans identified in the orders, including drawings prepared by Mackenzie Architects and Michael Siu dated 30/01/2017 and 01/02/2017.' "Pursuant to section 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Applicant is to pay the Respondent's...