SHA Operations Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2024] NSWLEC 1082

SHA Operations Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2024] NSWLEC 1082

The jurisdictional prerequisites for granting development consent were satisfied. The applicant's Clause 4.6 written request demonstrated sufficient grounds to justify exceeding the floor space ratio. The parties' agreement after conciliation resolved all disputed matters, and the grant of consent (subject to conditions) was lawful. Accordingly, the appeal was upheld, and development consent was granted. Costs thrown away by the amendments were ordered against the applicant.

Parties
Applicant: SHA Operations Pty Ltd; Respondent: Sutherland Shire Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Proceedings (land and Environment Court) / Determination Following Conciliation Conference; Judgment Disposing of the Appeal
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted; costs thrown away ordered against applicant
Legal Topics
Development Application, Amendment of Development Application, Grant of Development Consent, Cl 4.6 Exception (floor Space Ratio), Conciliation Conference Procedures, Costs Thrown Away
Planning and Environment Law Development Application Amendment of Development Application Grant of Development Consent Cl 4.6 Exception (floor Space Ratio) Conciliation Conference Procedures Costs Thrown Away

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SHA Operations Pty Ltd

Applicant

Sutherland Shire Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Proceedings (land and Environment Court) / Determination Following Conciliation Conference; Judgment Disposing of the Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the development application, as amended, should be granted consent under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's Clause 4.6 written request justifies contravention of the floor space ratio standard in the Sutherland Shire LEP 2015
  3. 3 Whether the jurisdictional prerequisites under the relevant legislation have been satisfied

Ratio Decidendi

The jurisdictional prerequisites for granting development consent were satisfied. The applicant's Clause 4.6 written request demonstrated sufficient grounds to justify exceeding the floor space ratio. The parties' agreement after conciliation resolved all disputed matters, and the grant of consent (subject to conditions) was lawful. Accordingly, the appeal was upheld, and development consent was granted. Costs thrown away by the amendments were ordered against the applicant.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted; costs thrown away ordered against applicant

Orders

  • The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs thrown away as a result of amendments to the development application in the agreed amount of $7,000, pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
  • The Clause 4.6 request relating to floor space ratio is upheld.