Modification of development consent invalid due to jurisdictional error

In brief - Following modification procedure will ensure proper jurisdiction is enlivened

The Land and Environment Court's recent decision in the case of Fenwick v Woodside Properties Pty Ltd [2016] NSWLEC 104 demonstrates the critical importance of the requirement to publicly notify applications for consent, in particular section 96(2) modification applications (under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979); and the Court's approach to time limits for allowing judicial review proceedings.

Jurisdictional error in earlier modifications renders later modifications invalid

In this case, a developer sought to make three successive section 96(2) modifications to a condition of development consent authorising a subdivision of land for residential purposes. The condition imposed a requirement for a restriction on the form and scale of dwellings to be constructed on the land. The Court found that the first two modifications sought had fallen