Outdoor Systems Pty Ltd v Georges River Council [2024] NSWLEC 1528

Outdoor Systems Pty Ltd v Georges River Council [2024] NSWLEC 1528

The Court was satisfied that the Amended Modification Application was substantially the same development as the original consent for the purposes of s 4.55(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Comparing the whole of the original development with the whole of the modified development, only one component changed: the approved static advertising billboard and its floodlighting would be replaced by an internally illuminated digital LED sign in the same general location, slightly smaller in size, with associated minor cladding changes and removal of floodlights. The business identification signs, parapet and supporting structures remained. The proposed sign would display...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal / Final Hearing of Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Modification Application
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent modified.
Legal Topics
['development Consent Modification' 'outdoor Advertising Signage' 'substantially the Same Development' 'digital Signage' 'traffic and Road Safety Conditions']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Consent Modification' 'outdoor Advertising Signage' 'substantially the Same Development' 'digital Signage' 'traffic and Road Safety 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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Development Appeal / Final Hearing of Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Modification Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Amended Modification Application was substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified, pursuant to s 4.55(2)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' 'Whether a conditional trial period requiring a further modification application should be imposed as a condition of consent.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the Amended Modification Application was substantially the same development as the original consent for the purposes of s 4.55(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Comparing the whole of the original development with the whole of the modified development, only one component changed: the approved static advertising billboard and its floodlighting would be replaced by an internally illuminated digital LED sign in the same general location, slightly smaller in size, with associated minor cladding changes and removal of floodlights. The business identification signs, parapet and supporting structures remained. The proposed sign would display...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent modified.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'Development Consent No DA2000/671 is modified pursuant to section 4.55(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the terms in Annexure A.' 'Development Consent No DA2000/671 as modified by the Court is set out in Annexure B.' 'The exhibits are returned except for Exs A and...