Sardi v Central Coast Council [2020] NSWLEC 1348

Sardi v Central Coast Council [2020] NSWLEC 1348

Because the late identification of potentially contaminated materials created a jurisdictional issue under cl 7 of State Environmental Planning Policy No 55—Remediation of Land and procedural fairness required the Applicant to have time to respond, the Respondent was granted leave to further amend its SOFAC and the hearing dates were vacated. However, the amendment was not permitted to extend to paragraph 99 concerning Eucalyptus biconvexa because that matter was unwarranted in circumstances where expert ecology evidence was available.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Concerning Refusal of Development Application DA 53997/2018 / Respondent's Notice of Motion to Further Amend Its Statement of Facts and Contentions and Vacation of Hearing Dates
Outcome
Respondent's notice of motion granted in part; hearing dates vacated; matter listed for further directions.
Legal Topics
['notice of Motion' 'amendment of Statement of Facts and Contentions' 'procedural Fairness' 'contaminated Land' 'development Application Refusal Appeal' 'vacation of Hearing Dates']
['planning and Environment' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['notice of Motion' 'amendment of Statement of Facts and Contentions' 'procedural Fairness' 'contaminated Land' 'development Application Refusal Appeal' 'vacation of Hearing Dates']

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 Concerning Refusal of Development Application DA 53997/2018 / Respondent's Notice of Motion to Further Amend Its Statement of Facts and Contentions and Vacation of Hearing Dates

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Respondent should be granted leave to further amend its statement of facts and contentions to address the late identification of potentially contaminated fill on the Subject Site.' 'Whether the hearing dates of 3 and 4 August 2020 should be vacated to allow the Applicant time to address the contamination issue.' 'Whether the proposed further amended statement of facts and contentions should include paragraph 99 concerning Eucalyptus biconvexa.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the late identification of potentially contaminated materials created a jurisdictional issue under cl 7 of State Environmental Planning Policy No 55—Remediation of Land and procedural fairness required the Applicant to have time to respond, the Respondent was granted leave to further amend its SOFAC and the hearing dates were vacated. However, the amendment was not permitted to extend to paragraph 99 concerning Eucalyptus biconvexa because that matter was unwarranted in circumstances where expert ecology evidence was available.

Court Disposition

Respondent's notice of motion granted in part; hearing dates vacated; matter listed for further directions.

Orders

  • ['The Respondent application made by way of notice of motion to further amend its SOFAC is granted, save for the material contained within paragraph 99 of its further amended SOFAC, which were annexed to its notice of motion, and which are not read.' "The dates of 3 and 4 August 2020, which the Court had set down...