Roche v Mid-Coast Council; Agiliti Pty Ltd v Mid-Coast Council [2021] NSWLEC 1292

Roche v Mid-Coast Council; Agiliti Pty Ltd v Mid-Coast Council [2021] NSWLEC 1292

Because the applicants accepted that the development consent had not been complied with and that Agiliti was the owner and Mr Roche was a person using the premises, the statutory preconditions for stop use and compliance orders were satisfied. The parties' agreed orders modifying the stop use orders and issuing an Order 11 compliance order were within the Court's powers under s 8.18 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and were decisions the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeals Under S 8.18 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Development Control Orders / Orders Made Following Agreement at a Conciliation Conference Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeals upheld; development control orders varied; an Order 11 compliance order issued to Agiliti Pty Ltd; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['development Control Orders' 'stop Use Orders' 'compliance Orders' 'development Consent Compliance' 'sand Quarry Rehabilitation' 'conciliation Agreement']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Control Orders' 'stop Use Orders' 'compliance Orders' 'development Consent Compliance' 'sand Quarry Rehabilitation' 'conciliation Agreement']

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 Appeals Under S 8.18 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Development Control Orders / Orders Made Following Agreement at a Conciliation Conference Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the development control orders issued by Mid-Coast Council should be revoked, modified, or substituted on appeal under s 8.18 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' "Whether the Court could make orders reflecting the parties' agreement reached in conciliation under s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether non-compliance with Development Consent DA215/95 supported stop use and compliance orders in relation to the sand quarry.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the applicants accepted that the development consent had not been complied with and that Agiliti was the owner and Mr Roche was a person using the premises, the statutory preconditions for stop use and compliance orders were satisfied. The parties' agreed orders modifying the stop use orders and issuing an Order 11 compliance order were within the Court's powers under s 8.18 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and were decisions the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Court Disposition

Appeals upheld; development control orders varied; an Order 11 compliance order issued to Agiliti Pty Ltd; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['In proceedings 2020/184455, the appeal is upheld.' 'The development control order issued to Mark Andrew Roche, addressed to Mark Andrew Roach and dated 2 June 2020, is varied by correcting the name to Mark Andrew Roche and replacing the terms of the stop use order.' 'The varied order requires Mark Andrew Roche to...