NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Anagnostou and ors v Canterbury Bankstown Council [2017] NSWLEC 1320 Hearing dates: 21 June 2017 Date of orders: 23 June 2017 Decision date: 23 June 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: O'Neill C Decision: 1. The appeal is upheld. 2. The part of the Interim Heritage Order published in the NSW Government Gazette No 80 and dated 30 September 2016 over "The properties known as 13 and 15 Crinan Street Hurlstone Park on the land described in schedule B", is revoked. 3. The exhibits, other than exhibit A, are returned. Catchwords: INTERIM HERITAGE ORDER: whether an Interim Heritage Order over two existing shops found not to reach the threshold for local heritage listing, but contributory to a draft heritage conservation area, should be revoked. Legislation Cited: The Heritage Act 1977 (NSW) Cases Cited: Byron Ventilink Pty Limited v Byron Shire Council [2005] NSWLEC 395 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Chris Anagnostou and Yong Woo Kim (Applicant) Canterbury Bankstown Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr G. McKee solicitor (Applicant) Mr A. Seton solicitor (Respondent)
Solicitors: McKee Legal Solutions (Applicant) Marsdens Law Group (Respondent) File Number(s): 2016/321006
Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to the provisions of s 30(1) of the Heritage Act 1977 (NSW) (Heritage Act) against the making of an Interim Heritage Order (IHO), which includes the properties at 13 and 15 Crinan Street, Hurlstone Park (the site), by Canterbury-Bankstown Council (the Council), on 30 September 2016 and published in the NSW Government Gazette No. 80 (exhibit 2 f 102). 2. The Council is authorised to make IHOs for items in the Council's area by an order made by the then Minister for Heritage on 12 July 2013 published in the NSW Government Gazette No. 90 (exhibit 2, f 112). The order is subject to the conditions in Schedule 2 for Local Councils to make IHOs. The IHO is made pursuant to sub-s 25(2) of the Heritage Act. 3. On appeal, the Court, standing in the shoes of the Council, may revoke an IHO, pursuant to s 29(4) of the Heritage Act.
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