Prasad v Penrith City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1669
The agreement reached between the parties under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 was within the Court’s jurisdiction to make, allowing the Court to dispose of the proceedings by making the orders as agreed; the Court was not required to assess the merits of the original issues.
- Parties
- First Applicant: Robert Prasad; Second Applicant: Mantri Prasad; Respondent: Penrith City Council
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 23 November 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Class 1 Appeal Against an Order / Conciliation Conference; Final Orders Made
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld in part; orders varied and imposed as per consent agreement
- Legal Topics
- Development Application, Appeal Against Council Order, Conciliation Conference, Enforcement Orders
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Robert Prasad
First Applicant
Mantri Prasad
Second Applicant
Penrith City Council
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against an Order / Conciliation Conference; Final Orders Made
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal could be resolved in the same proceeding as another related appeal
- 2 Whether the agreement between parties under s34(3) is within the Court's jurisdiction
- 3 Whether the orders given effect to the parties' agreement should be made
Ratio Decidendi
The agreement reached between the parties under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 was within the Court’s jurisdiction to make, allowing the Court to dispose of the proceedings by making the orders as agreed; the Court was not required to assess the merits of the original issues.
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld in part; orders varied and imposed as per consent agreement
Orders
- The appeal is upheld in part.
- Order 12(b) in the Table to section 121B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 given by the Respondent to the First and Second Applicants dated 6 December 2016 is modified by deleting the 'Terms of the Order' table referred to therein and inserting specified replacement terms.
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