Sydney Link Developments ATF Sydney Link Developments Trust v Fairfield City Council [2020] NSWLEC 1268

Sydney Link Developments ATF Sydney Link Developments Trust v Fairfield City Council [2020] NSWLEC 1268

The proposed modification meets the requirements of section 4.55(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, is substantially the same as the original development approval, and all jurisdictional prerequisites under the Act and Local Environmental Plan are satisfied.

Parties
Applicant: Sydney Link Developments ATF Sydney Link Developments Trust; Respondent: Fairfield City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Conciliation Conference and Final Orders
Outcome
Appeal upheld; modification application approved
Legal Topics
Modification Application, Development Consent, Deemed Refusal, Conciliation Conference

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sydney Link Developments ATF Sydney Link Developments Trust

Applicant

Fairfield City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Conciliation Conference and Final Orders

  1. 1 Whether the proposed modification is permissible under section 4.55(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
  2. 2 Whether the modification maintains substantial sameness to the originally approved development
  3. 3 Whether jurisdictional prerequisites are satisfied

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed modification meets the requirements of section 4.55(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, is substantially the same as the original development approval, and all jurisdictional prerequisites under the Act and Local Environmental Plan are satisfied.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; modification application approved

Orders

  • Applicant granted leave to amend application to rely on referenced plans in Annexure A
  • Appeal upheld