NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Jo Hancock Investments Pty Limited v Sydney City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1334 Hearing dates: 21 April and 1 August 2016 Date of orders: 12 August 2016 Decision date: 12 August 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Morris C Decision: Appeal upheld Catchwords: CONSENT ORDERS: impact on adjacent properties Legislation Cited: Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012; State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development; Texts Cited: Sydney Development Control Plan 2012; Residential Flat Design Code; Apartment Design Code Category: Principal judgment Parties: Jo Hancock Investments Pty Limited (Applicant)
Sydney City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Ms J Reid (Applicant) Mr P Clay (Respondent)
Solicitors: Pikes & Verekers (Applicant) Ms J Mort, Sydney City Council (Respondent) File Number(s): 151622 of 2016
Judgment 1. Jo Hancock Investments P/L (Hancock) lodged Development Application D/2014/1955 with Sydney City Council seeking consent to amalgamate 2 adjoining sites, demolish an existing three storey building and construct a new part 7 and part 6 storey residential flat building containing 32 apartments and parking for 10 vehicles and alter and add to an existing building to create 2 separate apartments. 2. The Council has refused consent and Hancock is appealing its deemed refusal. 3. Following an earlier conciliation conference, joint conferencing between experts and discussions between the parties, the applicant amended its proposal and was granted leave to rely on amended plans by the Court. As a result of the amendments made, the Council no longer presses its contentions and the Parties are seeking Consent Orders from the Court.
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