Surfrock Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2017] NSWLEC 1079

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Surfrock Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2017] NSWLEC 1079 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 23 January, 3 February and 7 February 2017 Date of orders: 22 February 2017 Decision date: 22 February 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Martin SC Decision: See (4) below Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Surfrock Pty Ltd (Applicant) Inner West Council (Respondent) Representation: Solicitors: S Gadiel, Mills Oakley (Applicant) S Patterson, Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent) File Number(s): 2016/374266 and 2017/7645 Publication restriction: No

Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: In this matter, at or after a conciliation conference, an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (the Court Act) was reached between the parties as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that was acceptable to the parties. As the presiding Commissioner, I was satisfied that the decision was one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions (this being the test applied by s 34(3) of the Court Act). As a consequence, s 34(3)(a) of the Act required me to "dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the decision". 2. The Court Act also required me to "set out in writing the terms of the decision" (s 34(3)(b)). The orders made to give effect to the agreement constitute that document. 3. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to make, and have not made, any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties. 4. The final orders to give effect to the parties' agreement under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are: 1. The Applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended plans and documents referred to in the conditions of consent contained in Annexure "A". 2. The appeals are upheld. 3. Deferred commencement conditions 1(b), 1(c), 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of Part A of development consent 10.2013.223.5 granted by the Respondent are satisfied in accordance with clause 95(5) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. 4. Modification application no. 10.2013.223.6 lodged with the Respondent on 15 November 2016 is determined by approving the modifications as set out in Annexure A. 5. As a consequence of (4), development consent 10.2013.223.5 granted by the Respondent is now subject to the consolidated, modified conditions of development consent set out in Annexure B. ……………. Rosemary Martin Senior Commissioner 7645.17+374266.16 Annexure A (C) (17.1 KB, pdf) 7645.17+374266.16 Annexure B (C) (83.7 KB, pdf) DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 22 February 2017