MY & OY Pty Ltd v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2022] NSWLEC 1721

MY & OY Pty Ltd v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2022] NSWLEC 1721

Because the parties reached agreement, the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites were satisfied, and the grant of Development Consent was a decision the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions, s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Pursuant to S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application No. DA 171/2022 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Development Application No. DA-171/2022, as amended, determined by grant of Development Consent subject to conditions; Applicant ordered to pay Respondent's agreed costs of $3,000.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'deemed Refusal Appeal' 'multi Dwelling Development' 'conciliation Conference' 'development Consent' 'costs']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'deemed Refusal Appeal' 'multi Dwelling Development' 'conciliation Conference' '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 Appeal Pursuant to S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application No. DA 171/2022 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court could make the agreed decision to grant Development Consent in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.' 'Whether relevant jurisdictional prerequisites to the grant of Development Consent were satisfied.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties reached agreement, the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites were satisfied, and the grant of Development Consent was a decision the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions, s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Development Application No. DA-171/2022, as amended, determined by grant of Development Consent subject to conditions; Applicant ordered to pay Respondent's agreed costs of $3,000.

Orders

  • ["The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs, pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, in the agreed amount of $3,000." 'The Appeal is upheld.' 'Development Application No. DA-171/2022, as amended, for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a...