Australia, July 3 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on June 3:

1. COMMISSIONER: Development for the purpose of a dwelling house is proposed on a site on the western half of the Hunters Hill peninsula, at a site known as 48 Barons Crescent, Hunters Hill.

2. To this end, development application DA2023/0134 was lodged with Hunters Hill Council on 30 October 2023 by the applicant in these proceedings, Mr Ebrahim Imseis and Ms Rina Imseis (together, the Applicants). The Applicants seek consent to demolish the existing dwelling on the site in order to construct a new dwelling house, swimming pool, landscaping and driveway (the DA).

3. The Council notified local residents of the development between 30 October 2023 and 13 November 2023, and received three submissions objecting to the proposal.

4. The Council refused the development on 25 June 2024, and the Applicants filed an appeal in Class 1 of the Court's jurisdiction on 11 December 2024, under s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act).

5. The appeal was listed for mandatory conciliation on 22 May 2025, in accordance with the provisions of s 34AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act).

6. After an onsite view, the conciliation conference convened in the rear yard of the subject site, during which the parties reached in-principle agreement on those issues in dispute.

7. A signed agreement prepared in accordance with s 34(10) of the LEC Act was submitted to the Court, dated 22 May 2025, and amended plans and other documents were filed on the same date.

8. The parties ask me to approve their decision as set out in the agreement before the Court. In general terms, the agreement approves the development subject to amended plans that were prepared on behalf of the Applicants, and noting that the final detail of the works and plans are specified in the agreed conditions of development consent annexed to the s34 agreement.

9. 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 prepared a jurisdictional statement to assist the Court in understanding how the requirements of the relevant environmental planning instruments have been satisfied in order to allow the Court to make the agreed orders at [31].

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/1971e49982ec3e403c6abbf3)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.