Pan v Canterbury Bankstown Council [2016] NSWLEC 1515

Pan v Canterbury Bankstown Council [2016] NSWLEC 1515

Where the parties have reached an agreement at a conciliation conference under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979, and the Court is satisfied that the agreed decision is one it could properly make, the proceedings must be disposed of in accordance with that agreement. The Court, in such circumstances, is not required to assess the merits of the original issues in dispute.

Parties
Applicant: Shuhui Pan; Respondent: Canterbury Bankstown Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Development Application Appeal / Final Disposition After Conciliation Conference
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to substituted plans/documents and agreed conditions; costs thrown away by the amendment to be paid by the Applicant.
Legal Topics
Development Application, Conciliation Conference, Agreement Between Parties, Court Act S 34(3), Orders on Consent
Planning and Environment Law Development Application Conciliation Conference Agreement Between Parties Court Act S 34(3) Orders on Consent

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shuhui Pan

Applicant

Canterbury Bankstown Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Development Application Appeal / Final Disposition After Conciliation Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant development consent following agreement between parties at conciliation conference under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Ratio Decidendi

Where the parties have reached an agreement at a conciliation conference under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979, and the Court is satisfied that the agreed decision is one it could properly make, the proceedings must be disposed of in accordance with that agreement. The Court, in such circumstances, is not required to assess the merits of the original issues in dispute.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to substituted plans/documents and agreed conditions; costs thrown away by the amendment to be paid by the Applicant.

Orders

  • The Applicant is given leave to amend the development application by substituting specified plans and documents as relied upon for the purpose of the application.
  • The Applicant is to pay those costs of the Respondent thrown away as a result of amending the development application pursuant to section 97B(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as agreed or assessed.