Council of the City of Sydney v Trico Constructions Pty Ltd [2015] NSWLEC 56

Council of the City of Sydney v Trico Constructions Pty Ltd [2015] NSWLEC 56

Trico's demolition of the pressed metal ceiling in bays 1 and 2 of Reid House without prior development consent breached cl 68 of Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2005 and s 76A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, thereby committing an offence against s 125(1). The offence caused actual heritage harm of medium seriousness and undermined the development control system, but was not proven to have been committed intentionally, recklessly, negligently or for financial gain, and overall objective seriousness was at the low end. Taking account of no prior convictions, genuine remorse, low risk of reoffending and a delayed guilty plea warranting a 15% discount, the appropriate...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Class 5 Criminal Prosecution for Carrying Out Development Without Consent Contrary to S 125(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Sentencing After Plea of Guilty to Amended Summons; Applications for Costs
Outcome
The defendant was convicted, fined $46,750, and ordered to pay the prosecutor's costs incurred on and after 18 November 2014; the defendant's application for costs was rejected.
Legal Topics
['carrying Out Development Without Consent' 'demolition of Pressed Metal Ceiling in Heritage Listed Building' 'objective Seriousness of Environmental Offence' 'general and Specific Deterrence' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'costs on Adjournment' "prosecutor's Costs After Conviction"]
['environmental Planning and Assessment' 'criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'heritage Conservation' 'costs'] ['carrying Out Development Without Consent' 'demolition of Pressed Metal Ceiling in Heritage Listed Building' 'objective Seriousness of Environmental Offence' 'general and Specific Deterrence' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'costs on Adjournment' "prosecutor's Costs After Conviction"]

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

Class 5 Criminal Prosecution for Carrying Out Development Without Consent Contrary to S 125(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Sentencing After Plea of Guilty to Amended Summons; Applications for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for demolishing part of a pressed metal ceiling in a heritage-listed building without prior development consent.' 'Whether the offence caused actual environmental harm and undermined the regulatory system of development control.' "Whether the defendant's plea of guilty warranted a discount and, if so, the extent of that discount." "Whether the prosecutor should pay the defendant's costs under s 257F of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 because of adjournments following the late amendment of the charge period." "Whether the defendant should pay the prosecutor's costs under s 257B of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 and whether any costs order should be limited because of the prosecutor's unreasonable conduct or delay."]

Ratio Decidendi

Trico's demolition of the pressed metal ceiling in bays 1 and 2 of Reid House without prior development consent breached cl 68 of Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2005 and s 76A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, thereby committing an offence against s 125(1). The offence caused actual heritage harm of medium seriousness and undermined the development control system, but was not proven to have been committed intentionally, recklessly, negligently or for financial gain, and overall objective seriousness was at the low end. Taking account of no prior convictions, genuine remorse, low risk of reoffending and a delayed guilty plea warranting a 15% discount, the appropriate...

Court Disposition

The defendant was convicted, fined $46,750, and ordered to pay the prosecutor's costs incurred on and after 18 November 2014; the defendant's application for costs was rejected.

Orders

  • ['The defendant is convicted of the offence as charged in the amended summons.' 'The defendant is fined $46,750.' "The defendant is to pay the prosecutor's costs incurred on and after 18 November 2014, in such amount as may be determined under s 257G of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986."]