Yu v Willoughby City Council [2022] NSWLEC 1157

Yu v Willoughby City Council [2022] NSWLEC 1157

The expert evidence and Sydney Water conditional approval supported the agreed modification of the development control order. Because s 8.18(4)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 empowers the Court on appeal to modify a development control order, the agreed decision was one the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979. The Court therefore disposed of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against a Development Control Order / Orders Made Following a Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and Agreement Under S 34(3)
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Development Control Order 3376 modified in the terms set out at Annexure A.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Development Control Order' 'unauthorised Garage' 'modification of Demolish Works Order' 'conciliation Conference Agreement' 'road Reserve Works' 'sydney Water Asset']
['planning and Environment' 'development Control Orders' 'building Information Certificates'] ['appeal Against Development Control Order' 'unauthorised Garage' 'modification of Demolish Works Order' 'conciliation Conference Agreement' 'road Reserve Works' 'sydney Water Asset']

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 1 Appeal Against a Development Control Order / Orders Made Following a Conciliation Conference Under S 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 and Agreement Under S 34(3)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Court should make orders modifying Development Control Order 3376 in accordance with the parties' agreement reached at conciliation." 'Whether the agreed modification was a decision the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.' 'Whether s 8.18(4)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 empowered the Court to modify the development control order on appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The expert evidence and Sydney Water conditional approval supported the agreed modification of the development control order. Because s 8.18(4)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 empowers the Court on appeal to modify a development control order, the agreed decision was one the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979. The Court therefore disposed of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Development Control Order 3376 modified in the terms set out at Annexure A.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' "Development Control Order 3376 issued to the Applicants on 14 May 2021 ordering the demolition of works at 16 Johnson Street Chatswood is modified in the terms set out at 'Annexure A' to this agreement."]