Crookston v Liverpool City Council [2021] NSWLEC 1739

Crookston v Liverpool City Council [2021] NSWLEC 1739

The Court considered that the substituted Development Control Order was within power, addressed all jurisdictional requirements and site constraints, resolved the issues raised, and was in accordance with agreement reached at conciliation. Accordingly, the appeal was upheld and the substituted order made.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Orders
Outcome
Appeal upheld
Legal Topics
['development Control Orders' 'conciliation Conference' 'permissibility of Use' 'zoning']
['planning and Environment'] ['development Control Orders' 'conciliation Conference' 'permissibility of Use' 'zoning']

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

Appeal / Final Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the use of the site as a transport depot is permissible under current planning controls' 'Whether the Development Control Order issued by Liverpool City Council should be substituted']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court considered that the substituted Development Control Order was within power, addressed all jurisdictional requirements and site constraints, resolved the issues raised, and was in accordance with agreement reached at conciliation. Accordingly, the appeal was upheld and the substituted order made.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'Pursuant to s 8.18 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Development Control Order in Annexure A to this agreement is substituted for the Development Control Order given by the Respondent to the Applicant on 17 September 2021.']