VadeLab

Development Application Granted with Conditions Following Conciliation Agreement

Land and Environment Court (NSW)

This page reproduces the official decision. It is published for readers who need the full text and is deliberately excluded from search engines.This decision was issued by the Land and Environment Court (NSW) and is reproduced from NSW Caselaw (Β© State of New South Wales) under its published republication policy. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.View on the official source β†—

πŸ“œ Headnote Official document

The appeal was upheld, and development consent was granted with conditions following a conciliation conference agreement between the parties.

πŸ“š Full judgment Official document

Land and [ADDRESS] South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: [NAME] v Sutherland Shire Council [2017] NSWLEC 1437 Hearing dates: Conciliation Conference on 11 August 2017 Date of orders: 14 August 2017 Decision date: 14 August 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: [NAME] C Decision: See (4) below Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and [ADDRESS] 1979 Cases Cited: Nil Texts Cited: Nil Category: Principal judgment Parties: [NAME] (Applicant) Sutherland Shire Council (Respondent) Representation: [NAME] (Solicitor) (Applicant) [NAME] (Solicitor) (Respondent) File Number(s): 187887 of 2017 Publication restriction: No

Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: In this matter, at or after a conciliation conference, an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and [ADDRESS] 1979 (the Court Act) was reached between the parties as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that was acceptable to the parties. As the presiding Commissioner, I was satisfied that the decision was one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions (this being the test applied by s 34(3) of the Court Act). As a consequence, s 34(3)(a) of the Act required me to "dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the decision". 2. [ADDRESS] also required me to "set out in writing the terms of the decision" (s 34(3)(b)). The orders made to give effect to the agreement constitute that document.

3. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to make, and have not made, any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.

4. The final orders to give effect to the parties' agreement under s34(3) of the Land and [ADDRESS] 1979 are:

1. The appeal is upheld.

2. Development Consent be granted to DA 15/0058 for the demolition of existing structures and erection of a dual occupancy on both lots and Torrens Title subdivision of both dual occupancies at [ADDRESS], Illawong, subject to the conditions in Annexure 'A'. ……………. [NAME] Commissioner 187887.17 (C) (256 KB, pdf) DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 15 August 2017

Development Application Granted with Conditions Following Conciliation Agreement β€” full judgment | VadeLab