Pyramid Consulting Pty Ltd v Georges River Council [2023] NSWLEC 1179

Pyramid Consulting Pty Ltd v Georges River Council [2023] NSWLEC 1179

The amended development application did not constitute a new development application because, as a matter of fact and degree, the development could still be described as a boarding house in a part 3, part 4 storey building with basement carparking, and the amendments were design and layout changes that reduced the scale of the development without changing its essence or overall concept. Alleged deficiencies in amended documents could be raised in an amended Statement of Facts and Contentions and did not determine the motion. The Respondent would not suffer genuine prejudice because a compressed timetable could preserve the allocated hearing dates, and costs thrown away would address the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal Interlocutory Motion Concerning Amendment of a Development Application / Notice of Motion for Leave to Amend Development Application Before Final Hearing
Outcome
Notice of Motion granted; leave to amend the development application approved; costs thrown away ordered as agreed or assessed; matter listed for directions.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Development Application' 'whether Amendment Constitutes a Fresh Development Application' 'consent Authority Functions Exercised by the Court' 'boarding House Development' 'prejudice and Costs Thrown Away']
['planning and Environment Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['amendment of Development Application' 'whether Amendment Constitutes a Fresh Development Application' 'consent Authority Functions Exercised by the Court' 'boarding House Development' 'prejudice and Costs Thrown Away']

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 Development Appeal Interlocutory Motion Concerning Amendment of a Development Application / Notice of Motion for Leave to Amend Development Application Before Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed amended development application was within the scope of cl 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 or constituted a new development application.' 'Whether discretionary matters, including alleged deficiencies in the amended material and prejudice to the Respondent, warranted refusal of leave to amend.' 'Whether costs thrown away should be ordered because the proposed amendments were more than minor.']

Ratio Decidendi

The amended development application did not constitute a new development application because, as a matter of fact and degree, the development could still be described as a boarding house in a part 3, part 4 storey building with basement carparking, and the amendments were design and layout changes that reduced the scale of the development without changing its essence or overall concept. Alleged deficiencies in amended documents could be raised in an amended Statement of Facts and Contentions and did not determine the motion. The Respondent would not suffer genuine prejudice because a compressed timetable could preserve the allocated hearing dates, and costs thrown away would address the...

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion granted; leave to amend the development application approved; costs thrown away ordered as agreed or assessed; matter listed for directions.

Orders

  • ['The Notice of Motion is granted.' 'The Court, exercising under s 39(2) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 the function of Georges River Council as consent authority, approves pursuant to clause 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 the Applicant amending Development Application...