Seeto - V - Marrickville Council [1999] NSWLEC 70

Seeto - V - Marrickville Council [1999] NSWLEC 70

The amendment sought does not convert the proposal into a fresh application as it retains the proposed change in operating hours limited to a particular part of the building; it is a change in detail, not in substance, and thus may be lawfully made.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 February 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Preliminary Question of Law
Outcome
Preliminary question answered: Amendment may be lawfully made and considered by the Court; matter stood over for further directions.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Application' 'development Consent Modification' 'powers of Appellate Court in Planning Matters']
['planning Law'] ['amendment of Application' 'development Consent Modification' 'powers of Appellate Court in Planning Matters']

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

Appeal / Preliminary Question of Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the application under s 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 may be lawfully amended as sought or whether a new application is required']

Ratio Decidendi

The amendment sought does not convert the proposal into a fresh application as it retains the proposed change in operating hours limited to a particular part of the building; it is a change in detail, not in substance, and thus may be lawfully made.

Court Disposition

Preliminary question answered: Amendment may be lawfully made and considered by the Court; matter stood over for further directions.

Orders

  • ['The amendment to the application may be lawfully made and considered by the Court.' "The application is stood over to the Registrar's list 9am on 10 February for directions."]