Pyramid Consulting Pty Ltd v Georges River Council [2022] NSWLEC 141

Pyramid Consulting Pty Ltd v Georges River Council [2022] NSWLEC 141

The separate question should not be ordered because all questions in the appeal should ordinarily be heard together; the identification of the applicable environmental planning instrument is part of the ordinary assessment of the one development application before the Court; the need for alternative cases was not real because the parties and objectors need only address the current development application and development; and answering the separate question would not dispose of the appeal and may increase delay and cost rather than facilitate the just, quick and cheap resolution of the proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (nsw) Against the Deemed Refusal of a Development Application for a Boarding House Development / Notice of Motion Under R 28.2 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw) Seeking a Separate Question to Be Heard and Decided
Outcome
Notice of motion dismissed; conciliation conference vacated and relisted; appeal listed for hearing; procedural directions made.
Legal Topics
['separate Question' 'development Application' 'boarding House Development' 'state Environmental Planning Policy' 'savings Provision' 'conciliation Conference']
['environmental Planning and Development' 'practice and Procedure'] ['separate Question' 'development Application' 'boarding House Development' 'state Environmental Planning Policy' 'savings Provision' 'conciliation Conference']

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 Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (nsw) Against the Deemed Refusal of a Development Application for a Boarding House Development / Notice of Motion Under R 28.2 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw) Seeking a Separate Question to Be Heard and Decided

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a question concerning whether the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 or the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 applies to the development application should be heard and decided separately from all other questions in the appeal.' 'Whether separate determination of the applicable State environmental planning policy would facilitate the just, quick and cheap resolution of the proceedings.' 'Whether the parties, experts and objectors needed to prepare alternative cases based on the possible application of either the ARH SEPP or the Housing SEPP.']

Ratio Decidendi

The separate question should not be ordered because all questions in the appeal should ordinarily be heard together; the identification of the applicable environmental planning instrument is part of the ordinary assessment of the one development application before the Court; the need for alternative cases was not real because the parties and objectors need only address the current development application and development; and answering the separate question would not dispose of the appeal and may increase delay and cost rather than facilitate the just, quick and cheap resolution of the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion dismissed; conciliation conference vacated and relisted; appeal listed for hearing; procedural directions made.

Orders

  • ['The notice of motion filed 28 October 2022 is dismissed.' 'The conciliation conference listed for 18 November 2022 is vacated.' 'A conciliation conference is listed for 10 February 2023.' 'The appeal is listed for hearing for three days on 19 to 21 April 2023.' "The parties are to confer and, if possible, agree...