Nicholas Tang Holdings Pty Limited v Waverley Council [2020] NSWLEC 1072
The Court upheld the appeal and approved the development application because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3), the Court was satisfied the agreed decision was one it could make in the proper exercise of its functions, the clause 4.6 written requests for the height and FSR contraventions were well founded, and all pre-conditions to the granting of consent had been met.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 06 March 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application No. 40/2019 / Orders Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld; Development Applicant No. 40/2019 approved subject to conditions.
- Legal Topics
- ['development Application' 'residential Flat Building' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between the Parties' 'clause 4.6 Variation Request' 'maximum Height Development Standard' 'floor Space Ratio Development Standard' 'affordable Rental Housing Contribution']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application No. 40/2019 / Orders Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the Court could make orders giving effect to the parties' agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." "Whether the applicant's clause 4.6 written requests justified contraventions of the maximum height and floor space ratio development standards in the Waverley Local Environmental Plan 2012." 'Whether all pre-conditions to the grant of development consent had been met.']
Ratio Decidendi
The Court upheld the appeal and approved the development application because the parties reached an agreement under s 34(3), the Court was satisfied the agreed decision was one it could make in the proper exercise of its functions, the clause 4.6 written requests for the height and FSR contraventions were well founded, and all pre-conditions to the granting of consent had been met.
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld; Development Applicant No. 40/2019 approved subject to conditions.
Orders
- ['The Applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended Class 1 Application, a copy of which is annexed and marked "A".' 'The Applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended plans, copies of which are annexed and marked "B for the purposes of the development application.' "The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment