Rowlane Investments Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Council [2013] NSWLEC 60

Rowlane Investments Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Council [2013] NSWLEC 60

The development consent was for the erection of a building, and before the lapsing date geotechnical work and survey work were physically commenced on the land. Those works were linked to conditions of the consent and related to the building. They therefore constituted engineering work within s 95(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, so the development consent had not lapsed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Proceedings Seeking Declaratory Relief Concerning Development Consent / Principal Judgment; Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Declaration made that the development consent has not lapsed; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['development Consent' 'lapsing of Consent' 'engineering Work' 'survey Work' 'geotechnical Work']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Consent' 'lapsing of Consent' 'engineering Work' 'survey Work' 'geotechnical Work']

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 4 Proceedings Seeking Declaratory Relief Concerning Development Consent / Principal Judgment; Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether development consent No. D/2005/289 had lapsed under s 95 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' 'Whether geotechnical work and survey work physically commenced on the land before the lapsing date constituted engineering work relating to the approved building development.']

Ratio Decidendi

The development consent was for the erection of a building, and before the lapsing date geotechnical work and survey work were physically commenced on the land. Those works were linked to conditions of the consent and related to the building. They therefore constituted engineering work within s 95(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, so the development consent had not lapsed.

Court Disposition

Declaration made that the development consent has not lapsed; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Declaration that development consent No. D/2005/289 granted by Leichhardt Council on 19 March 2007 for the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of a new residential flat building containing three units above basement carparking at Lots 1 & 2, SP19170, (No. 25) Ennis Street, Balmain has not lapsed....