Lilnance Holdings Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1097

Lilnance Holdings Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1097

Development consent was granted for the amended child care facility as all jurisdictional and statutory preconditions were met, the Court was satisfied the agreement between parties was permissible, and there were no constraints precluding the orders. The appeal was upheld, and consent granted subject to conditions.

Parties
First Applicant: Lilnance Holdings Pty Ltd ACN 663 462 360; Second Applicant: Lilnance Projects Pty Ltd; Respondent: Penrith City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Determination After Conciliation Conference
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted; costs order made
Legal Topics
Development Applications, Child Care Centres, Conciliation Conference, Development Consent, Statutory Interpretation
Planning and Environment Development Applications Child Care Centres Conciliation Conference Development Consent Statutory Interpretation

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lilnance Holdings Pty Ltd ACN 663 462 360

First Applicant

Lilnance Projects Pty Ltd

Second Applicant

Penrith City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Determination After Conciliation Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether development consent should be granted for a centre-based child care facility at 196-198 Bennett Road, St Clair
  2. 2 Whether the statutory and jurisdictional prerequisites to consent are met under relevant planning instruments and legislation
  3. 3 Whether there are jurisdictional constraints to making the orders sought

Ratio Decidendi

Development consent was granted for the amended child care facility as all jurisdictional and statutory preconditions were met, the Court was satisfied the agreement between parties was permissible, and there were no constraints precluding the orders. The appeal was upheld, and consent granted subject to conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted; costs order made

Orders

  • The Applicant is to pay the Respondent $15,000 in costs thrown away as a result of the Amended Development Application within 21 days.
  • The appeal is upheld.