Panorama No. 1 Pty Ltd ATF Panorama No. 1 Fixed Unit Trust v Inner West Council [2021] NSWLEC 1120

Panorama No. 1 Pty Ltd ATF Panorama No. 1 Fixed Unit Trust v Inner West Council [2021] NSWLEC 1120

Because the amended boarding house proposal was permissible with consent, satisfied or acceptably addressed the relevant SEPP ARH controls and development standards, did not encounter an impediment under cl 30A, adequately responded to heritage and public submission issues, and was a decision the Court could make in the exercise of its functions, s 34(3)(a) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 required the proceedings to be disposed of in accordance with the parties' agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Refusal of Development Application Da2020/0565 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference Agreement
Outcome
Appeal upheld and Development Application DA2020/0565 approved subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['boarding House Development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'affordable Rental Housing' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites for Consent' 'costs Thrown Away for Amended Plans']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent'] ['boarding House Development Application' 'conciliation Conference' 'affordable Rental Housing' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites for Consent' 'costs Thrown Away for Amended Plans']

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 Refusal of Development Application Da2020/0565 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference Agreement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the agreed decision to uphold the appeal and grant development consent 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 jurisdictional prerequisites under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 2013 were satisfied for the amended boarding house proposal.' 'Whether public submissions, heritage impacts, local character, parking, solar access, privacy, acoustic impacts and development standards precluded the grant of consent.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the amended boarding house proposal was permissible with consent, satisfied or acceptably addressed the relevant SEPP ARH controls and development standards, did not encounter an impediment under cl 30A, adequately responded to heritage and public submission issues, and was a decision the Court could make in the exercise of its functions, s 34(3)(a) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 required the proceedings to be disposed of in accordance with the parties' agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld and Development Application DA2020/0565 approved subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended plans listed at Condition 1 of Annexure A.' "Pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the applicant is to pay the respondent's costs thrown away in respect of the amended plans in the sum of $4000 within 28 days of the date...