{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Ostaford Pty Limited v Newcastle City Council
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
Ostaford Pty Limited v Newcastle City Council
[2016] NSWLEC 1198
Tags
No tags available
Case
Ostaford Pty Limited v Newcastle City Council
[2016] NSWLEC 1198
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Amendment notes Medium Neutral Citation: Ostaford Pty Limited v Newcastle City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1198 Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 22 February, 11 April 2016Date of orders: 18 May 2016 Decision date: 18 May 2016 Jurisdiction:Class 1Before: Brown C Decision: See (5) below Catchwords: DEVELOPMEMNT APPLICATION: demolition of existing improvements – construction of take away food premises - conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category:Principal judgmentParties: Ostaford Pty Limited (Applicant) Newcastle City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr M Staunton, barrister (Applicant) Ms A Pearman, barrister (Respondent) Solicitors: Kingston Swift (Applicant) Newcastle City Council (Respondent) File Number(s):11074 of 2015Judgment COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal of Development Application No DA 2014/1093 for the demolition of all existing improvements and the construction of take away food premises at 111 Newcastle Road Wallsend. 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...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Ostaford Pty Limited v Newcastle City Council
[2016] NSWLEC 1198
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Amendment notes Medium Neutral Citation: Ostaford Pty Limited v Newcastle City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1198 Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 22 February, 11 April 2016Date of orders: 18 May 2016 Decision date: 18 May 2016 Jurisdiction:Class 1Before: Brown C Decision: See (5) below Catchwords: DEVELOPMEMNT APPLICATION: demolition of existing improvements – construction of take away food premises - conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category:Principal judgmentParties: Ostaford Pty Limited (Applicant) Newcastle City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr M Staunton, barrister (Applicant) Ms A Pearman, barrister (Respondent) Solicitors: Kingston Swift (Applicant) Newcastle City Council (Respondent) File Number(s):11074 of 2015Judgment COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal of Development Application No DA 2014/1093 for the demolition of all existing improvements and the construction of take away food premises at 111 Newcastle Road Wallsend. 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...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>