NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Karunaretnam v Strathfield Municipal Council [2007] NSWLEC 688
APPLICANT Sinnappu Karunaretnam PARTIES : RESPONDENT Strathfield Municipal Council
FILE NUMBER(S) : 10772 of 2007
CORAM: Hussey C
KEY ISSUES: Development Application :- extension of trading hours for an existing restaurant
LEGISLATION CITED: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
DATES OF HEARING: 21/09/2007 and 25/09/2007
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 9 November 2007
APPLICANT Mr O. Stitcher, solicitor of Otto Stichter & Associates LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:
RESPONDENT Mr S. Patterson, solicitor of Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie Lawyers
JUDGMENT: THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES
Hussey C
9 November 2007
10772 of 2007 Sinnappu Karunaretnam v Strathfield Municipal Council
JUDGMENT The Appeal. 1 This appeal was lodged against council's refusal of a development application, which proposed the extension of trading hours for an existing restaurant at 32 Burlington Road, Homebush. The change in operating hours involves: o Approved operating hours; 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., seven days per week. o Proposed trading hours; 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., seven days per week.
2 The subject site is zoned Business 3 (a) under the Strathfield Planning Scheme Ordinance. Clauses 41C and 61 GA (e) are relevant where development on land adjoins land in a residential zone. The proposal is permissible within the zone.
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