United Super Investments Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council [2003] NSWLEC 61

United Super Investments Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council [2003] NSWLEC 61

The 1986 consent orders contained an unintentional clerical error or mistake and did not entirely and truly reflect the common intent of the parties or the intention of the Court; because the orders had been made by consent, the Court had power to correct or vary them by consent, and it was appropriate to make the agreed orders without considering broader environmental management issues.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Application Under Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, S 96 for Modification of a Development Consent / Ex Tempore Judgment by Consent
Outcome
Application granted by consent; consent orders made to correct the longstanding clerical error or mistake in the 1986 order.
Legal Topics
['modification of Development Consent' 'correction of Accidental Error in Consent Orders' 'consent Orders']
['planning and Environment Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['modification of Development Consent' 'correction of Accidental Error in Consent Orders' 'consent Orders']

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

Application Under Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, S 96 for Modification of a Development Consent / Ex Tempore Judgment by Consent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an unintentional clerical error or mistake infected the 1986 consent orders modifying the development consent.' 'Whether the Court had power to correct or vary the consent orders by consent.' "Whether the Council's concerns about contemporary environmental management practices needed to be addressed in determining the application."]

Ratio Decidendi

The 1986 consent orders contained an unintentional clerical error or mistake and did not entirely and truly reflect the common intent of the parties or the intention of the Court; because the orders had been made by consent, the Court had power to correct or vary them by consent, and it was appropriate to make the agreed orders without considering broader environmental management issues.

Court Disposition

Application granted by consent; consent orders made to correct the longstanding clerical error or mistake in the 1986 order.

Orders

  • ['The Court made the orders set out in the short minutes prepared by the parties and signed by their legal representatives.' 'The two documentary exhibits, Exhibit A and Exhibit 1, were directed to remain with the Court papers.']