Menangle Park 1 Pty Ltd v Campbelltown City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1198

Menangle Park 1 Pty Ltd v Campbelltown City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1198

Because the development application was properly made, the proposed subdivision and road development was permissible, no applicable development standard was contravened, required infrastructure arrangements were addressed, SEPP 55 contamination requirements were satisfactorily addressed through investigations and conditions, and coal mine subsidence approval issues could be managed by deferred commencement consent, the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The Court was therefore required to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement by upholding the appeal and granting development consent subject to conditions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Pursuant to S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against the Respondent's Deemed Refusal of Development Application 1580/2018/da SW / Final Orders Following a Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; Applicant granted leave to rely on amended plans; Applicant ordered to pay the Respondent's costs thrown away as a result of the amendments.
Legal Topics
['development Application Appeal' 'subdivision' 'roads and Associated Works' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites for Development Consent' 'deferred Commencement Consent' 'remediation of Land' 'coal Mine Subsidence']
['planning and Environment' 'development Consent' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['development Application Appeal' 'subdivision' 'roads and Associated Works' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites for Development Consent' 'deferred Commencement Consent' 'remediation of Land' 'coal Mine Subsidence']

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 Pursuant to S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against the Respondent's Deemed Refusal of Development Application 1580/2018/da SW / Final Orders Following a Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreed decision was a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether jurisdictional prerequisites to granting development consent were satisfied, including proper making of the DA, permissibility, development standards, State public infrastructure arrangements, public utility infrastructure, SEPP 55 contamination requirements, and approval issues arising from coal mine subsidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the development application was properly made, the proposed subdivision and road development was permissible, no applicable development standard was contravened, required infrastructure arrangements were addressed, SEPP 55 contamination requirements were satisfactorily addressed through investigations and conditions, and coal mine subsidence approval issues could be managed by deferred commencement consent, the parties' agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The Court was therefore required to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement by upholding the appeal and granting development consent subject to conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; Applicant granted leave to rely on amended plans; Applicant ordered to pay the Respondent's costs thrown away as a result of the amendments.

Orders

  • ['The Applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended plans identified in the orders.' "The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs thrown away as a result of the amendments pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, in the agreed amount of $6800 within 14 days of the...