NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Council of the City of Sydney v NFF at 410 Pitt Street Pty Ltd [2016] NSWLEC 149 Hearing dates: 26 October 2016 Date of orders: 25 November 2016 Decision date: 25 November 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Pain J Decision: (1)The Applicant's appeal under s 56A of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 is dismissed. (2)The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs of this appeal. (3)The exhibits are to be returned. Catchwords: APPEAL – s 56A appeal from Commissioner's decision – no error in construction of local environmental plan identifying development requirements for freestanding tower on narrow block in CBD – no failure to take into account a mandatory relevant consideration – irrelevant consideration not taken into account – appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 4, 79C Interpretation Act 1987, s 34 Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 56A Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2005, cl 50 Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012, cl 6.16, Dictionary Cases Cited: Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue (Northern Territory) (2009) 239 CLR 27; [2009] HCA 41 Brimbella Pty Ltd v Mosman Municipal Council (1985) 79 LGERA 367 Carstens v Pittwater Council (1999) 111 LGERA 1; [1999] NSWLEC 249 Cranbrook School v Woollahra Municipal Council (2006) 66 NSWLR 379; [2006] NSWCA 155 Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Consolidated Media Holdings Ltd (2012) 250 CLR 503; [2012] HCA 55 Heatscape Pty Ltd v Mahoney (No 2) (2016) 217 LGERA 332; [2016] NSWLEC 45 Hoy v Coffs Harbour City Council [2015] NSWLEC 128 Independent Commission Against Corruption v Cunneen (2015) 256 CLR 1; [2015] HCA 14 NFF at 410 Pitt Street Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Sydney [2016] NSWLEC 1181 Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355; [1998] HCA 28 Segal v Waverley Council (2005) 64 NSWLR 177; [2005] NSWCA 310 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Council of the City of Sydney (Applicant) NFF at 410 Pitt Street Pty Ltd (Respondent) Representation: COUNSEL: I Hemmings SC (Applicant) D T Miller SC (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