Ash v Shoalhaven City Council [2020] NSWLEC 1279

Ash v Shoalhaven City Council [2020] NSWLEC 1279

Because the parties reached agreement at the conciliation conference and the agreed decision to uphold the appeal and modify the development control order was one the Court could have made 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 that agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against a Development Control Order/demolish Works Order / Orders Made Following Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development control order modified; each party to pay its own costs.
Legal Topics
['development Control Order' 'demolish Works Order' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'modification of Order']
['environmental Planning and Assessment' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['development Control Order' 'demolish Works Order' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'modification of Order']

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 Appeal Against a Development Control Order/demolish Works Order / Orders Made Following Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) 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 reached at the conciliation conference." "Whether the parties' agreed decision was one 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 the development control order should be modified under s 8.18(4)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties reached agreement at the conciliation conference and the agreed decision to uphold the appeal and modify the development control order was one the Court could have made 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 that agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development control order modified; each party to pay its own costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' "Pursuant to section 8.18(4)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the development control order issued by the Respondent to the Applicant dated 4 February 2020 is modified in accordance with the development control order at Annexure 'A'." 'Each party shall pay its own...