{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Parker Logan Property Pty Ltd v Waverley 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
Parker Logan Property Pty Ltd v Waverley Council
[2016] NSWLEC 1035
Tags
No tags available
Case
Parker Logan Property Pty Ltd v Waverley Council
[2016] NSWLEC 1035
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Parker Logan Property Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2016] NSWLEC 1035 Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 8 December 2015Date of orders: 14 January 2016 Decision date: 14 January 2016 Jurisdiction:Class 1Before: Brown C Decision: See (5) below Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: alterations and additions to an approved residential flat building; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category:Principal judgmentParties: Parker Logan Property Pty Ltd (Applicant) Waverley Council (Respondent) Representation: Mr Anthony Boskovitz (Applicant) Mr Stephen Patterson (Respondent) Solicitors: Boskovitz & Associates (Applicant) Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s):10768 of 2015Judgment COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal of the amendment of Development Application No. DA – 266/2015 for alterations and additions to an approved residential building at 93 Old South Head Road, Bondi Junction 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...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Parker Logan Property Pty Ltd v Waverley Council
[2016] NSWLEC 1035
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Parker Logan Property Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2016] NSWLEC 1035 Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 8 December 2015Date of orders: 14 January 2016 Decision date: 14 January 2016 Jurisdiction:Class 1Before: Brown C Decision: See (5) below Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: alterations and additions to an approved residential flat building; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category:Principal judgmentParties: Parker Logan Property Pty Ltd (Applicant) Waverley Council (Respondent) Representation: Mr Anthony Boskovitz (Applicant) Mr Stephen Patterson (Respondent) Solicitors: Boskovitz & Associates (Applicant) Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s):10768 of 2015Judgment COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal of the amendment of Development Application No. DA – 266/2015 for alterations and additions to an approved residential building at 93 Old South Head Road, Bondi Junction 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...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>