Tomtome Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2024] NSWLEC 1187

Tomtome Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2024] NSWLEC 1187

The appeal is upheld and development consent granted because the amended DA, agreed between the parties, adequately addresses all statutory requirements and contentions, resolves public submission issues, and satisfies local and state planning controls and policy requirements.

Parties
Applicant: Tomtome Pty Ltd; Respondent: Sutherland Shire Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal – Development Application / Final Determination Following Conciliation Conference
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted to amended DA; costs order in favour of Respondent.
Legal Topics
Development Application, Residential Apartment Building, Conciliation Conference, Appeal Against Deemed Refusal
Planning and Environment Law Development Application Residential Apartment Building Conciliation Conference Appeal Against Deemed Refusal

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tomtome Pty Ltd

Applicant

Sutherland Shire Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Appeal – Development Application / Final Determination Following Conciliation Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether development consent should be granted for amended Development Application DA23/0129
  2. 2 Whether amended DA addresses the Respondent's initial contentions and public submissions
  3. 3 Whether the proposal satisfies all relevant statutory and planning instrument requirements

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is upheld and development consent granted because the amended DA, agreed between the parties, adequately addresses all statutory requirements and contentions, resolves public submission issues, and satisfies local and state planning controls and policy requirements.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted to amended DA; costs order in favour of Respondent.

Orders

  • Leave granted to Applicant to amend DA23/0129 and rely on amended plans/documents referred to in Condition 1 at Annexure A.
  • Applicant to pay Respondent's costs thrown away due to amendment in the sum of $23,000 within 90 days.