Nessdee Pty Limited v Orange City Council (No 2) [2017] NSWLEC 182

Nessdee Pty Limited v Orange City Council (No 2) [2017] NSWLEC 182

The revised plans, plans of management and conditions of consent reflected the Court's earlier reasons and were acceptable, so development consent could be granted. Because the development application had been modified throughout the hearing and the amendments viewed together were not minor, leave to amend was required and the applicant had to pay the first respondent's costs thrown away by the amendment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal / Final Orders Granting Development Consent After Revised Plans, Plans of Management and Conditions of Consent Were Provided
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted on conditions; applicant granted leave to amend the development application and ordered to pay the first respondent's costs thrown away by the amendment.
Legal Topics
['development Application for Heliport' 'amendment of Development Application' 'costs Thrown Away' 'development Consent on Conditions']
['environmental and Planning Law'] ['development Application for Heliport' 'amendment of Development Application' 'costs Thrown Away' 'development Consent on Conditions']

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 / Final Orders Granting Development Consent After Revised Plans, Plans of Management and Conditions of Consent Were Provided

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the revised plans, plans of management and conditions of consent reflected the Court's earlier reasons and were acceptable for the grant of development consent." 'Whether leave should be granted to amend the development application to reflect modifications made throughout the hearing.' "Whether an order should be made for payment of the first respondent's costs thrown away as a result of the amendment."]

Ratio Decidendi

The revised plans, plans of management and conditions of consent reflected the Court's earlier reasons and were acceptable, so development consent could be granted. Because the development application had been modified throughout the hearing and the amendments viewed together were not minor, leave to amend was required and the applicant had to pay the first respondent's costs thrown away by the amendment.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted on conditions; applicant granted leave to amend the development application and ordered to pay the first respondent's costs thrown away by the amendment.

Orders

  • ['The applicant is granted leave to amend its development application for a heliport to be as described in the plans and documents specified in condition 1 of the development consent in Attachment A.' 'The applicant is to pay the costs of the first respondent that are thrown away as a result of amending the...