Your Questions: Bowie Ferris Investments v Woollahra Municipal Council
Following on from a recent article on this judgment, we answer your questions about the judgment and consequences of it.
Read MoreExploring planning, environment, and local government law issues in New South Wales
Following on from a recent article on this judgment, we answer your questions about the judgment and consequences of it.
Read MoreAs demonstrated by the recent decision in Bowie Ferris Investments Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council, heritage listings can also present significant challenges, particularly when the use of a building is integral to its heritage value.
Read MoreThe recent decision in Petersham High Pty Ltd v Inner West Council offers insights into the use and assessment of clause 4.6 variation requests.
Read MoreIn a recent judgment, the NSW Land and Environment Court clarified some important considerations that must be adhered to when drafting and defending conditions of consent. Here are five lessons every local council should consider.
Read MoreThe key phrases of the judgment reference “substantial non-compliant excavation and building works,” yet, like many similar cases, it leaves the full extent of these issues open to interpretation.
Read MoreIn this recent decision, the Land and Environment Court highlighted a critical issue in development assessment – late-stage changes to a development application.
Read MoreExpert evidence – and the clarity of its reasoning – can play a critical role in determining heritage outcomes.
Read MoreIn the recent judgment, the Land and Environment Court tackled a key procedural issue: whether the outcome of a Section 8.2 review is appealable.
Read MoreThe legal interpretation of what constitutes a “road” plays a significant role in property development, particularly when access roads serve adjacent structures in zones with distinct planning constraints.
Read MoreIn the case Nicholas Tang Holdings Pty Limited v Berbic and Wingecarribee Shire Council [2024] NSWLEC 95, the Land and Environment Court invalidated the council’s development consent due to errors in its assessment process.
Read More