UPG 182 Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1737

UPG 182 Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1737

The parties' s 34 agreement to uphold the appeal and grant development consent to the amended development application subject to conditions was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions because the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites and planning considerations had been...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against the Deemed Refusal of Development Application No. DA 21 02226 / Orders After S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
The appeal is upheld and Development Application No. DA-21-02226 is determined by the grant of development consent subject to the conditions at Annexure "A".
Legal Topics
['development Appeal' 'deemed Refusal' 's 34 Conciliation Conference' 'development Application' 'subdivision' 'residential Development' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites' 'conditions of Consent']
['planning and Environmental Law' 'development Consent' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['development Appeal' 'deemed Refusal' 's 34 Conciliation Conference' 'development Application' 'subdivision' 'residential Development' 'jurisdictional Prerequisites' 'conditions of Consent']

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 Development Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against the Deemed Refusal of Development Application No. DA 21 02226 / Orders After S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' decision in the s 34 agreement was a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions." 'Whether the jurisdictional prerequisites for the Court to grant development consent to the amended development application were satisfied.' 'Whether the amended development application could be approved subject to conditions having regard to the relevant planning instruments and statutory considerations.']

Ratio Decidendi

The parties' s 34 agreement to uphold the appeal and grant development consent to the amended development application subject to conditions was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions because the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites and planning considerations had been addressed; therefore s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with that agreement.

Court Disposition

The appeal is upheld and Development Application No. DA-21-02226 is determined by the grant of development consent subject to the conditions at Annexure "A".

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'Development Application No. DA-21-02226 for the demolition of existing structures, tree removal, subdivision of land into 13 lots, comprising 12 Torrens Title lots and 1 superlot, construction of 12 two-storey dwellings, construction of 11 two-storey townhouses, construction of a public and...