NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Council of the City of Sydney v Wilson Parking Australia Pty Ltd and Anor [2015] NSWLEC 42 Hearing dates: 21 to 23 July 2014 Last written submissions 08.08.14. Date of orders: 26 March 2015 Decision date: 26 March 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 4 Before: Beech-Jones AJ Decision: The Court declares that:
(1)The First Respondent is unlawfully using the premises situated at and known as land at the rear of 4-6 York Street in the City of Sydney ("the premises") for the purposes of public car parking ("the purpose") in contravention of the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012 and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
The Court orders that:
(2)the First Respondent, its servants, contractors and agents be restrained from using, permitting or suffering the use of the premises for the purpose without first having
(a)obtained development consent therefor; and
(b)complying with any conditions of such consent which must be complied with prior to the use commencing.
(3)the Respondents, their servants, contractors and agents be restrained from
(a)advertising or holding out the premises or any part of them as available for the purpose; and
(b)leasing or licensing the premises or any part of them for the purpose.
(4)Orders 2 and 3 be stayed up to and including 23 April 2015.
(5)Grant liberty to apply within 21 days hereof in respect of costs and the form of relief. Catchwords: LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT – jurisdiction to hear claim in contract and promissory estoppel – Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 16(1A) – meaning of "matter" – whether matter ancillary to matter otherwise falling within Court's jurisdiction – agreement to cease use on premises if class 1 proceedings unsuccessful – whether dispute about agreement ancillary to matter subject of class 1 proceedings – whether ancillary to dispute over whether use of premises in breach of planning instrument – whether ancillary matter can be litigated if matter otherwise within Court's jurisdiction is not litigated.
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