NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: IPM Holdings Pty Limited v The Council of the City of Sydney [2020] NSWLEC 1593 Hearing dates: 16 December 2019; 11-14 May 2020; Mention on 2 November 2020 Date of orders: 27 November 2020 Decision date: 27 November 2020 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dixon SC Decision: The Court orders that: (1) The appeal is dismissed. (2) The exhibits are returned except for R2.1 and R4.2. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – voluntary planning agreement – consideration of the orderly and economic development of land and the public interest Legislation Cited: Conveyancing Act 1919 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012 Cases Cited: Australian International Academy of Education Inc v The Hills Shire Council (2013) 196 LGERA 1; [2013] NSWLEC 1 Baron Corporation Pty Limited v The Council of the City of Sydney [2019] NSWLEC 61 Conservation of North Ocean Shores Inc v Byron Shire Council (2009) 167 LGERA 52; [2009] NSWLEC 69 Currey v Sutherland Shire Council and Russell (2003) 129 LGERA 223; [2003] NSWCA 300 O'Sullivan v Farrer (1989) 168 CLR 210; [1989] HCA 61 Parramatta City Council v Precision Rubber Service Pty Ltd [1995] NSWLEC 34 Pilbara Infrastructure Pty Ltd v Australian Competition Tribunal (2012) 246 CLR 379; [2012] HCA 36 Sydney City Council v Ipoh Pty Ltd (2006) 68 NSWLR 411; [2006] NSWCA 300 Warkworth Mining Limited v Bulga Milbrodale Progress Association Inc (2014) 86 NSWLR 527; [2014] NSWCA 105 Wingecarribee Shire Council v Pancho Properties Pty Ltd (2001) 117 LGERA 104; [2001] NSWCA 271 Texts Cited: Planning Agreement Guidelines Category: Principal judgment Parties: IPM Holdings Pty Limited (Applicant) The Council of the City of Sydney (First Respondent) The Owners Corporation SP90950 (Second Respondent) The Owners Corporation SP16624 (Third Respondent) The Owners Corporation of Strata Scheme 98841 (Fourth Respondent) Representation: Counsel: J Lazarus SC with L Waterson (Applicant) K Richardson (First Respondent) I Hemmings SC (Second and Third Respondents) D Knoll (Fourth Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate