Celik v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2018] NSWLEC 1430

Celik v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2018] NSWLEC 1430

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 proceedings had to be disposed of in accordance with that agreement, without a merit assessment of the disputed issues.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Actual Refusal of Modification Application No. 593/2014/b / Orders Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Development Consent No. DA-593/2014 modified in accordance with the parties' s 34(3) agreement.
Legal Topics
['modification Application' 'dual Occupancy' 'mezzanine Levels in Garages' 'conciliation Conference' 'section 34 Agreement']
['planning and Environment' 'development Consent Modification'] ['modification Application' 'dual Occupancy' 'mezzanine Levels in Garages' 'conciliation Conference' 'section 34 Agreement']

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 Against Actual Refusal of Modification Application No. 593/2014/b / Orders Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Court should dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether Development Consent No. DA-593/2014 should be modified to allow a mezzanine level above each of the two approved double height garages.']

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 proceedings had to be disposed of in accordance with that agreement, without a merit assessment of the disputed issues.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Development Consent No. DA-593/2014 modified in accordance with the parties' s 34(3) agreement.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'Leave is granted to amend the application that is the subject of these proceedings, being the application DA-593/2014/B to modify Development Consent No. DA-593/2014, by substituting the specified Archispectrum plans dated 13.08.2018 as the plans relied upon for the purpose of the...