NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Anupam Das & Anor v Inner West Council [2017] NSWLEC 1609 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 27 October 2017 Date of orders: 31 October 2017 Decision date: 31 October 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: O'Neill C 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: Anupam Das (First Applicant) Shakeela Ahmed (Second Applicant) Inner West Council (Respondent) Representation: Solicitors: Mr S Griffiths, Bartier Perry Lawyers (First and Second Applicant) Mr S Turner, Inner West Council (Respondent) File Number(s): 2017/229174 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 appeal is upheld. 2. The Applicant is granted leave to amend Development Application No. D/2017/78 and to rely upon the following amended plans and documents, copies of which are behind Annexure "A": Plan Reference Drawn By Dated 01 Rev D – COVER OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 02 Rev D – PLANS – SITE & ROOF OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 03 Rev D – PLAN-GROUND FLOOR OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 04 Rev D – PLAN-FIRST FLOOR OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 05 Rev D – ELEVATION – NW OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 06 Rev D – ELEVATION – NE OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 07 Rev D – ELEVATION – SW OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 08 Rev D – SECTION AA OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 09 Rev D – SECTIONS – BB & CC OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 010 Rev D – SECTION DD & SET UP OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 011 Rev D – SHADOW DIAGRAM – June 21 9am OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 012 Rev D – SHADOW DIAGRAM – June 21 Noon OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 013 Rev D – SHADOW DIAGRAM – June 21 3pm OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 014 Rev D – FINISHES SCHEDULE OIKOS Architects 29/09/17 015 Rev D – SITE ANALYSIS OIKOS Architects 29/09/17
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