Australia, June 18 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on May 19:

1. COMMISSIONER: This is a Class 1 Development Appeal pursuant to s 8.18 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) being an appeal against the Development Control Order (DCO) NO-5593 in terms of Order No. 1 (stop use), 3 (demolish works) and 10 (restore works) (DCO) pursuant to s 9.34 and sch 5, Pt 1 of the EPA Act at 89-91 Ramsgate Avenue, North Bondi NSW 2026 legally described as Lot 10 in DP 343534 (the Site).

2. The DCO required the Applicant to comply with the following orders:

(a) Cease use of the non-trafficable area at rear unit;

(b) To demolish unauthorised works;

(c) To restore the premises to its original condition before the unauthorised buildings works were completed; and

(d) To notify Council when all things specified in the order are complete and premises is restored to the condition in which it was before the building works were unlawfully carried out.

3. The Site is occupied by an existing three storey residential flat building containing twelve apartments with at grade parking under the building. The applicant is the owner of the Site.

4. The SOFAC summarises the following unauthorised works that have allegedly been carried out at the Site, specifically at unit 6 (there may be additional unauthorised works):

(a) New pantry and laundry replacing existing kitchen.

(b) New kitchen built adjacent to pantry.

(c) Extension of the internal living replacing the roof terrace.

(d) Pergola has been installed at the rear of the top unit.

(e) Non-trafficable area of rooftop has been opened up increasing the size of the balcony.

5. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under subs 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which has been held on 9 May 2025. I presided over the conciliation conference.

6. At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal and modifying the DCO.

7. Under subs 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' decision if the parties' decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to, and have not, made any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.

8. The parties' decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 8.18 of the EPA Act to modify a development control order.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/196c6e0012f67c811af74345)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.