Prominent Ventures Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2022] NSWLEC 1709

Prominent Ventures Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2022] NSWLEC 1709

Because the Modification Application was made with the consent of the owners, remained substantially the same as the parent development consent, was notified with no submissions received, complied with or acceptably addressed the relevant planning instruments and policies, and reflected an agreement that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the Court upheld the appeal and modified Development Consent DA143/2020 in the agreed terms.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Pursuant to S 8.9 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Concerning a Modification Application to Modify Development Consent Da143/2020 / Final Orders Following Agreement Reached at a Conciliation Conference Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Development Consent DA143/2020 modified by consent orders.
Legal Topics
['modification Application' 'multi Dwelling Housing Development' 'section 34 Conciliation Agreement' 'floor Space Ratio' 'environmental Planning Instruments' 'basix']
['planning and Environment' 'development Consent Modification'] ['modification Application' 'multi Dwelling Housing Development' 'section 34 Conciliation Agreement' 'floor Space Ratio' 'environmental Planning Instruments' 'basix']

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 Pursuant to S 8.9 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Concerning a Modification Application to Modify Development Consent Da143/2020 / Final Orders Following Agreement Reached at a Conciliation Conference Under S 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreed decision was a decision 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 the Modification Application satisfied the jurisdictional prerequisites for modification of Development Consent DA143/2020 under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' 'Whether the modified development remained substantially the same as the parent development consent.' 'Whether the proposed exceedance of the floor space ratio development standard was acceptable.' 'Whether relevant environmental planning instruments and notification requirements were satisfied.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Modification Application was made with the consent of the owners, remained substantially the same as the parent development consent, was notified with no submissions received, complied with or acceptably addressed the relevant planning instruments and policies, and reflected an agreement that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, the Court upheld the appeal and modified Development Consent DA143/2020 in the agreed terms.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Development Consent DA143/2020 modified by consent orders.

Orders

  • ['Leave is granted to the Applicant to amend DA143/2020 and rely on the amended plans and documents listed at condition A.8 of Annexure A.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development Consent DA143/2020 is modified in the terms set out at Annexure A.' 'Development Consent DA143/2020 as modified by the Court is set out at...