NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Austral Projects Group Pty Ltd v Liverpool City Council [2021] NSWLEC 1396 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 29 June 2021 Date of orders: 7 July 2021 Decision date: 07 July 2021 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Bradbury AC Decision: The Court orders that: (1) The Applicant is granted leave to amend the development application to rely upon the plans and documents referred to in condition 1 of Annexure A. (2) The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs thrown away by the amendment referred to in Order 1 above pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW). (3) The appeal is upheld. (4) Development application 131/2019 seeking consent for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a childcare centre with associated basement parking, landscaping and site works is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure A. Catchwords: APPEAL – development application – child care facility – conciliation conference – agreement reached – orders made Legislation Cited: Education and Care Services National Regulations Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 4.14, 4.15, 4.16, 8.7 and 8.10 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, cll 49 and 55 Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 34 State Environmental Planning Policy – Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities 2017, cl 22 State Environmental Planning Policy – Sydney Region Growth Centres 2006, Appendix 8: Liverpool Growth Centres Precinct Plan, cll 2.3, 4.3 and 6.1 State Environmental Planning Policy No 55— Remediation of Land, cl 7 State Environmental Planning Policy No 64 – Advertising and Signage, cl 3.1 and Schedule 1 Texts Cited: NSW Department of Planning and Environment, Child Care Planning Guideline, 2017 NSW Rural Fire Service, Planning for Bushfire Protection, 2019 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Austral Projects Group Pty Ltd (Applicant) Liverpool City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Dr J Smith (Applicant) R O'Gorman-Hughes (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