Australia, June 7 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on May 6:

1. COMMISSIONER: This Class 1 appeal is brought under s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) following the deemed refusal by Waverley Council of Development Application DA-345/2023 seeking consent for the demolition of existing structures, construction of a pair of four-storey semi-detached dwellings, in-ground swimming pool, landscaping and Torrens title subdivision at 15 Wonderland Avenue, Tamarama.

2. The appeal was initially listed before me for hearing on 2-3 April 2025. However, on 25 March 2025, the parties advised the Court that the parties had reached agreement as to the terms of decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties, and sought the matter be re-allocated under s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) for conciliation.

3. The Court granted the application and arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the LEC Act between the parties, which was held on 2 April 2025, at which I presided.

4. The decision of the parties involved the Court upholding the appeal and granting conditional development consent to the development application, subject to an adjournment to prepare amended plans consistent with the in-principle agreement.

5. A signed agreement prepared in accordance with s 34(10) of the LEC Act was filed with the Court on 24 March 2025.

6. The parties ask me to approve their decision as set out in the s 34 agreement before the Court. This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal and granting conditional development consent to the development application.

7. In general terms, the agreement approves the development subject to amended plans that were prepared by the Applicant, and noting that the final detail of the works and plans are specified in the agreed conditions of development consent annexed to the s 34 agreement.

8. Under s 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. The parties' decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.16 of the EPA Act to grant consent to the development application. There are jurisdictional prerequisites that must be satisfied before this function can be exercised.

9. For the reasons set out below, I am satisfied that the parties' decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.

10. The Development Application was lodged with the Council, with the written consent of the owner, on 23 November 2023, and was notified between 28 November 2023 and 12 December 2023.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/1969dd2398776c35b16b985b)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.