Nathan Carlini v Canterbury Bankstown Council [2018] NSWLEC 1156

Nathan Carlini v Canterbury Bankstown Council [2018] NSWLEC 1156

Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the Court was required to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that decision and make orders giving effect to the agreement without making a merit assessment of the issues originally in dispute.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Orders Following Conciliation Conference Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
The appeal is upheld and Development Application No. DA-162/2017, as amended, is approved subject to conditions in Annexure A.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties' 'section 34 Orders']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties' 'section 34 Orders']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Orders Following Conciliation Conference Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the agreement reached between the parties under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 should be given effect by orders of the Court.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the Commissioner was satisfied that the agreed decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the Court was required to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that decision and make orders giving effect to the agreement without making a merit assessment of the issues originally in dispute.

Court Disposition

The appeal is upheld and Development Application No. DA-162/2017, as amended, is approved subject to conditions in Annexure A.

Orders

  • ['The Applicant is granted leave to amend Development Application No. DA-162/2017 and to rely upon the amended plans listed in the orders.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development Application No. DA-162/2017 (as amended) for the demolition of an existing garage and construction of a new single garage with attached...