Australia, Sept. 1 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on July 31:

1. TCOMMISSIONER: This appeal concerns a development control order issued by Sutherland Shire Council on 28 October 2024 (the order) concerning premises at 452-456 The Boulevarde, Kirrawee. The order was issued pursuant to s 9.34(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EPA Act), which allows a development control order to be given in accordance with the table to Pt 1 of Sch 5 to the EPA Act. The order is a compliance order, issued pursuant to Item 11 of Pt 1 of Sch 5. It requires the applicant to comply with conditions of consent for development consent DA14/1398 for the alterations and additions to an existing industrial building and use as a waste recycling and management centre. The applicant, Sydney Metal Recyclers Pty Ltd, appeals against the order pursuant to s 8.18 of the EPA Act. The final orders on the appeal, which substitute the order with a new compliance order, are made as a result of an agreement between the parties that was reached at a conciliation conference.

2. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 9 July 2025. I presided over the conciliation conference.

3. Following the conciliation conference, an agreement under s 34(3) of the LEC Act was reached between the parties as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that was acceptable to the parties. The final signed agreement was filed on 23 July 2025. The signed agreement is supported by a Joint Jurisdictional Statement by the parties. The agreement is for the order to be substituted with a new order, which similarly is a compliance order pursuant to Item 11 of Pt 1 of Sch 5 of the EPA Act.

4. To make orders in accordance with the agreement, I must be satisfied that the decision to make orders to substitute the order with a new order in the agreed terms is a decision that the Court can make in the proper exercise of its functions (this being the test applied by s 34(3) of the LEC Act).

5. The substituted order remains an order requiring compliance with the conditions of consent for the development consent DA14/1398. It also provides for interim works to reduce the immediate impacts of works that have been carried out in contravention of the development consent, with scope to obtain another development consent for new works. Item 11 of Pt 1 of Sch 5 to the EPA Act allows a development control order to be issued as a compliance order where a planning approval, which includes a development consent, has not been complied with. The parties agree that works have occurred at the premises in contravention of the development consent DA14/1398. Therefore, there is power to issue the order.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/1985425ee9ec357239faf66a)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.