PTHT Pty Limited v Mid-Coast Council [2021] NSWLEC 1483

PTHT Pty Limited v Mid-Coast Council [2021] NSWLEC 1483

Because the parties agreed to the grant of the exemption subject to conditions and the Commissioner was satisfied that the jurisdictional preconditions were met, including that the pool wall was a barrier no less effective than the statutory requirements and that the conditions would restrict access, the agreed decision was one the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the proceedings were disposed of accordingly.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Appeal Concerning an Application for an Exemption Under S 22 of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 / Orders Made Following Agreement Reached at a Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal upheld; exemption application approved subject to conditions in Annexure A.
Legal Topics
['exemption From Swimming Pool Fencing Requirements' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'section 34 Orders']
['planning and Environment' 'local Government' 'swimming Pool Safety Regulation'] ['exemption From Swimming Pool Fencing Requirements' 'conciliation Conference' 'agreement Between Parties' 'section 34 Orders']

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 2 Appeal Concerning an Application for an Exemption Under S 22 of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 / Orders Made Following Agreement Reached at a Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court could approve an exemption for the identified swimming pool from the requirements of section 7(a) and (b) of the Swimming Pools Act 1992.' 'Whether the agreed decision to grant the exemption subject to conditions was one the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties agreed to the grant of the exemption subject to conditions and the Commissioner was satisfied that the jurisdictional preconditions were met, including that the pool wall was a barrier no less effective than the statutory requirements and that the conditions would restrict access, the agreed decision was one the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and the proceedings were disposed of accordingly.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; exemption application approved subject to conditions in Annexure A.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'The application for an exemption for the identified swimming pool from the requirements of section 7(a) and (b) of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 at Lot 1 SP 82729, 1/88 Boomerang Drive, Boomerang Beach NSW is approved subject to the conditions contained in Annexure A.']