ARTICLE
11 September 2017

Approach to classifying NSW land as Residential or Business is confirmed

S
Swaab

Contributor

Swaab, established in 1981 in Sydney, Australia, is a law firm that focuses on solving problems and maximizing opportunities for various clients, including entrepreneurs, family businesses, corporations, and high-net-worth individuals. The firm's core values include commitment, integrity, excellence, generosity of spirit, unity, and innovation. Swaab's lawyers have diverse expertise and prioritize building long-term client relationships based on service and empathy.
This case conformed that it is not necessary to have a building ready for occupation to classify it as "residential".
Australia Real Estate and Construction
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Approach to classifying land as "residential" or "business" is confirmed: Karimbla Properties v Council of the City of Sydney; Bayside City Council; and North Sydney City Council [2017] NSWLEC 75

WHY IS KARIMBLA IMPORTANT?

Justice Sheehan confirmed the approach to determining when to categorise land as "residential" under section 516 of the Local Government Act 1993. It is not necessary to have a building ready for occupation in order to classify it as "residential". The Court can order the Council to repay rates paid under an incorrect classification.

THE DECISION

While the Councils in the proceedings adopted slightly different approaches to their arguments, one of the central issues was whether Meriton Apartments Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council [2003] NSWLEC 309 (Parramatta) was correctly decided. Sheehan J considered there was no reason to depart from the ratio decidendi in Parramatta, and confirmed that "activities implementing a development consent, which will lead to a residential development of a type not excluded by the section, dictate that the land in such circumstances be categorised for rating purposes as for "residential accommodation." [98]

Sheehan J also considered whether the Court could order a repayment of rates paid previously under the incorrect categorisation. North Sydney argued that if a refund was sought, different proceedings for restitution would be required. Sheehan J was satisfied that having regard to the objective of finality in proceedings (section 64(2) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005) and the broad jurisdiction of the Land and Environment Court, that it was possible to make an order for repayment, and that it was appropriate to do so. The Applicants were therefore entitled to a repayment of rates paid previously under different categorisations [124].

Find the case here.

For further information please contact:

Cecilia Rose, Partner
Phone: + 61 2 9233 5544
Email: cxr@swaab.com.au

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

ARTICLE
11 September 2017

Approach to classifying NSW land as Residential or Business is confirmed

Australia Real Estate and Construction

Contributor

Swaab, established in 1981 in Sydney, Australia, is a law firm that focuses on solving problems and maximizing opportunities for various clients, including entrepreneurs, family businesses, corporations, and high-net-worth individuals. The firm's core values include commitment, integrity, excellence, generosity of spirit, unity, and innovation. Swaab's lawyers have diverse expertise and prioritize building long-term client relationships based on service and empathy.
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More