NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: oOh! Media Assets Pty Ltd v The Council of the City of Sydney and anor [2015] NSWLEC 1269 Hearing dates: 7,8,9 April 2015 and 3,4 June 2015 Date of orders: 22 July 2015 Decision date: 22 July 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Brown ASC Decision: 1. The appeal is dismissed. 2. Development Application D/2014/1002 for the replacement of an existing static sign with a digital sign on the roof of the Oxford Hotel at 134 Oxford Street Darlinghurst is refused. 3. The exhibits are returned with the exception of exhibits 6, 1R, A and C. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: replacement of the existing static rooftop general advertising sign to a digital LED display screen – existing use rights - detrimental impact on heritage significance of contributory building, the heritage conservation area and the streetscape - affect the ability of a driver to discern the presence of, and/or change in traffic control light nearby leading to an increased risk of collisions - divert a drivers attention, both visually and cognitively, from the task of operating a motor vehicle leading to an increased risk of collisions – visual impact Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 State Environmental Planning Policy No 64 Sydney Development Control Plan 2012 Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012 Cases Cited: Carden and anor v Willoughby Municipal Council (1985) 56 LGRA 366. Cracknell & Lonergan Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2012] NSWLEC 197 Jojeni Investments Pty Ltd v Mosman Municipal Council [2015] NSWCA 147 South Sydney City Council v Nettlefold Advertising (1999) NSWLEC 21 Stromness Pty Limited v Woollahra Municipal Council [2006] NSWLEC 587 Category: Principal judgment Parties: oOh! Media Assets Pty Ltd (Applicant) The Council of the City of Sydney (First Respondent) Roads and Maritime Services of New South Wales (Second Respondent) Representation: Mr P Tomasetti SC (Applicant) Mr I Hemmings SC (First Respondent) Mr M Staunton, barrister (Second 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