{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Chen v Roads and Maritime Services
Download as PDF
Download as Word
Highlights
My Notes
Collections
Create a New Collection
Overview
Full Text
{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Details
Case
Agency Issuance Number
Published Date
Chen v Roads and Maritime Services
[2016] NSWLEC 1229
Tags
No tags available
Case
Chen v Roads and Maritime Services
[2016] NSWLEC 1229
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Chen v Roads & Maritime Services [2016] NSWLEC 1229 Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 2 June 2016Date of orders: 08 June 2016 Decision date: 08 June 2016 Jurisdiction:Class 3Before: Maston AC Decision: See (4) below Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category:Principal judgmentParties: Xueqin Chen (Applicant) Roads and Maritime Services of New South Wales (Respondent) Representation: Mr A Perkins, Project Lawyers (Applicant) Mr H Kalarostaghi Hunt & Hunt (Respondent) File Number(s):2016/158091Publication restriction:NoJudgment 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”. 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. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to, and have not, made any...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Chen v Roads and Maritime Services
[2016] NSWLEC 1229
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Chen v Roads & Maritime Services [2016] NSWLEC 1229 Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 2 June 2016Date of orders: 08 June 2016 Decision date: 08 June 2016 Jurisdiction:Class 3Before: Maston AC Decision: See (4) below Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category:Principal judgmentParties: Xueqin Chen (Applicant) Roads and Maritime Services of New South Wales (Respondent) Representation: Mr A Perkins, Project Lawyers (Applicant) Mr H Kalarostaghi Hunt & Hunt (Respondent) File Number(s):2016/158091Publication restriction:NoJudgment 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”. 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. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to, and have not, made any...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>