Hardie v Sutherland Shire Council [2021] NSWLEC 1345

Hardie v Sutherland Shire Council [2021] NSWLEC 1345

The parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979, and the Court was satisfied that the agreed decision was one it could have made in the proper exercise of its functions because the appeal was validly brought, the applicant owned the land, the secondary dwelling was permissible with consent in the E4 Environmental Living zone, applicable LEP standards and relevant planning instruments were addressed, and no jurisdictional impediment was identified. The Court therefore granted leave to rely on amended plans, upheld the appeal and granted development consent subject to conditions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Concerning a Development Application for a New Secondary Dwelling / Conciliation Conference Under Ss 34 Aa(2)(a) and 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Agreement Reached and Final Orders Made
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Consent' 'secondary Dwelling' 'conciliation Conference' 'section 34 Agreement' 'amended Plans' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites']
['environmental Planning and Development' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['development Consent' 'secondary Dwelling' 'conciliation Conference' 'section 34 Agreement' 'amended Plans' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites']

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 a Development Application for a New Secondary Dwelling / Conciliation Conference Under Ss 34 Aa(2)(a) and 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Agreement Reached and Final Orders Made

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted under cl 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 for the applicant to rely on amended plans' "Whether the parties' agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions" 'Whether development consent should be granted for development application DA19/0739 subject to conditions']

Ratio Decidendi

The parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979, and the Court was satisfied that the agreed decision was one it could have made in the proper exercise of its functions because the appeal was validly brought, the applicant owned the land, the secondary dwelling was permissible with consent in the E4 Environmental Living zone, applicable LEP standards and relevant planning instruments were addressed, and no jurisdictional impediment was identified. The Court therefore granted leave to rely on amended plans, upheld the appeal and granted development consent subject to conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The Applicant be granted leave to rely on the amended plans set out in Condition 2 of Annexure A.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development consent is granted to development application DA19/0739 for the construction of a new secondary dwelling on Lot 22 DP 239395 known as 142 Prince Edward Park Rd Woronora subject to...