Universal Property Group Pty Limited v Blacktown City Council [2020] NSWLEC 1300

Universal Property Group Pty Limited v Blacktown City Council [2020] NSWLEC 1300

Because the proposed works were permissible with development consent, applicable Growth Centres SEPP requirements were satisfied or inapplicable, essential public utility infrastructure was available or adequately arranged, SEPP 55 contamination requirements were satisfied, and notification, submissions and referral...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Pursuant to S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against the Deemed Refusal of Development Application DA 18 00159 / Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Parties Reached Agreement and Final Orders Were Made
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Development Application No. DA-18-00159 approved subject to conditions at Annexure A.
Legal Topics
['development Application Appeal' 'deemed Refusal' 'conciliation Conference' 'subdivision' 'growth Centres Sepp' 'remediation of Land' 'jurisdictional Pre Requisites']
['planning and Environment' 'development Consent' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['development Application Appeal' 'deemed Refusal' 'conciliation Conference' 'subdivision' 'growth Centres Sepp' 'remediation of Land' 'jurisdictional Pre Requisites']

Source-derived case record

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 1 Appeal Pursuant to S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against the Deemed Refusal of Development Application DA 18 00159 / Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Parties Reached Agreement and Final Orders Were Made

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreement was a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979" 'Whether jurisdictional pre-requisites for granting development consent under s 4.16 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 were satisfied' 'Whether requirements concerning permissibility, public utility infrastructure, contamination and remediation, notification, submissions and agency referrals were satisfied']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the proposed works were permissible with development consent, applicable Growth Centres SEPP requirements were satisfied or inapplicable, essential public utility infrastructure was available or adequately arranged, SEPP 55 contamination requirements were satisfied, and notification, submissions and referral matters had been addressed, the jurisdictional pre-requisites were met. The parties' agreed decision was therefore one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, requiring the Court under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Development Application No. DA-18-00159 approved subject to conditions at Annexure A.

Orders

  • ['The Applicant is granted leave to rely upon the reports listed in order 17(1).' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development Application No. DA-18-00159 is approved for the consolidation of Lot 5 DP1245610, Lot 6 DP1245610; Lot 11 DP1245610, Lot 7 DP1245610, Lot 60 DP1196729, Lot 8 DP 1245610, Lot 21 DP 1191512, Lot 20 DP...