Nasip v Central Coast Council [2024] NSWLEC 1807
The DCO was validly issued because the retaining walls exceeded 600mm, were not exempt, and were constructed without required development consent or certification. The applicant failed to establish grounds to revoke or modify the order; demolition is warranted due to unresolved hazard risks.
- Parties
- Applicant: Salih Nasip; Respondent: Central Coast Council
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 17 December 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Against Development Control Order (demolish Works) / Final Judgment After Contested Hearing
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Development Control Orders, Demolition Orders, Retaining Walls, Exempt Development, Planning Consent Requirements
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Salih Nasip
Applicant
Central Coast Council
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Development Control Order (demolish Works) / Final Judgment After Contested Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the retaining walls required development consent
- 2 Whether the development control order (DCO) should be revoked or modified
- 3 Whether the retaining walls are exempt development under the Codes SEPP
Ratio Decidendi
The DCO was validly issued because the retaining walls exceeded 600mm, were not exempt, and were constructed without required development consent or certification. The applicant failed to establish grounds to revoke or modify the order; demolition is warranted due to unresolved hazard risks.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The exhibits are returned with the exception of Exhibit A, B, and 1
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment