LEC Class 4 Action to be lodged on https://onlineregistry.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/

I need legal assistance to file a LEC Class 4 action case: Painters Lane Developments Pty Ltd Vs Central Coast Council.
Requirements:
- Draft and prepare a Notice of Motion
- Draft an affidavit including:
- Details of the case
- Supporting evidence
Background:
• In accordance with the conditions of consent for DA/49578/2016, an easement approval letter was prepared and formally submitted to Council on the 18 March 2021. The deferred development consent stated 1.1 b) ii. Written permission and deed of agreement to enter the site and construct the sewer location is to be obtained from the owners of No. 333-337 Mann Street.
• This document was submitted to satisfy the requirement tied to the development approval (relating to access, drainage or services).
• No response, acknowledgment, or action was ever received from Council in over 4 years since the document was first submitted to Council.
• At the time I was dealing with a Planning Assessment Officer by the name of Erin Murphy who advised me over the phone that once I submitted the Deed, if she had any issues with it she would come back to me. I therefore correctly assumed that the information she was in receipt of was satisfactory to meet 1.1 b) and no amendments were required.
• Unbeknown to myself after 18 March 2021, the neighbours property requiring the easement was sold.

Once I submitted the final Sydney Trains deferred development consent conditions 1.1a) which Sydney Trains had approved and council agreed were satisfied (29 April 2025), it was then that I was first notified in writing from Central Coast Council saying i had not satisfied condition 1.1 b) and my Development Application had expired. They claimed that it was submitted to them on the final day it was due and they did not have sufficient time to review it to make changes so that it remained valid in perpetuity. • in writing to me however, the council planning officer was not aware that i had previously sent the deed of agreement on 18 March 2021 and I immediately provided him with evidence proving as such. It was now pointed out to Council that they had this document in their possession for over four years and to now claim this is the first time they were in receipt of it was particularly unfair. Rather than admit fault and accept the fact that this was a major blunder on their part, the current planning officer and their department continue to
state that my development application has expired and they cannot assist me any further.

Impact:

Council’s failure to respond or assess the easement approval:
• Represents a failure to discharge its administrative responsibilities under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW);
• May have impacted the legal standing of the easement and exposed both the former and new owner to risk or cost;
• Has caused ongoing uncertainty and potentially prejudiced future development or legal processes.• If this is not resolved immediately, my banks are looking to call in loans which will leave me in a position where I will lose more than $30 million dollars in which i will have no other choice other than to hold the council responsible for. To highlight the seriousness of where this is atm, the lack of an operative consent on my DA since 29 April 2025 has caused my lender to write to me to pay out their loan by 1 September 2025 or I face them taking over the properties. I had a development agreement sale in place that was for $30 million that was subject to this operative consent being issued and now everything is at risk because of Council believing that they have done nothing wrong by not reviewing a document that was critical to my operative consent that was in their electronic possession since 18 March 2021. What makes matters worse is when I escalated this matter to both the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor, it was referred to their internal team for investigation. That internal team who works for the same employer, cleared all the employees of their employer of any wrongdoing. What made their investigation completely flawed was that they were investigating their own, and their two parties most crucial to this investigation being myself and a former employee being Erin Murphy, neither one of us were interviewed to determine the major error back in 2021 when Council had receipt of this document and did nothing with it.

Under the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Council has a duty to:
• Respond to submissions relevant to development consent conditions;
• Act within reasonable timeframes (even if no statutory timeframe applies directly to easement acknowledgment, 4 years is clearly unreasonable);
• Not act in a way that causes unnecessary financial harm to an applicant, particularly if their inaction affects land title or resale.

So yes, Council is at fault here yet it appears they are hoping that by digging their heels in, I will walk away from this and be frustrated into fighting for what is correct. Their failure to do their job four years ago cannot be excused. I seek an intermediate intervention.

I will be filing a class 4 action case in the LEC for 54 Million plus monthly interest of 300k from the 29 April 2025 for both projects which will fall over as a result councils negligence and the banks retaking the properties when I already have executed contracts of sale and an option agreement amounting for the above I am wanting to sue the council for.

This is a serious case of potential Council maladministration, especially since:
• The easement approval letter was submitted 4 years ago;
• The Council never responded (no approval, no rejection, no request for more info);
• The property was sold, likely relying on the existence or implication of that easement;
• And now I am dealing with consequences from Council’s inaction.

Who’s At Fault?

Under the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Council has a duty to:
• Respond to submissions relevant to development consent conditions;
• Act within reasonable timeframes (even if no statutory timeframe applies directly to easement acknowledgment, 4 years is clearly unreasonable);
• Not act in a way that causes unnecessary financial harm to an applicant, particularly if their inaction affects land title or resale.

So yes, Council appears at fault here.

A. Background

The situation I describe above involves a complex interplay between development consent conditions, deferred commencement consents, and the responsibilities of local councils under New South Wales (NSW) planning law. The core issue revolves around whether a condition of a deferred commencement consent was satisfied by the submission of a deed of agreement to a council officer, and the legal implications of the council's failure to acknowledge or act upon that submission over an extended period.

B. Legal Basis

The primary legal framework for this situation is established by the following NSW legislation and regulations:

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EP&A Act)

Section 4.16(3) states:

"A development consent may be granted subject to a condition that the consent is not to operate until the applicant satisfies the consent authority, in accordance with the regulations, as to any matter specified in the condition. Nothing in this Act prevents a person from doing such things as may be necessary to comply with the condition."

Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW) (EP&A Regulation)

Clause 76 provides detailed requirements for deferred commencement consents:

(2) A deferred commencement consent must clearly distinguish between— (a) conditions that relate to matters about which the consent authority must be satisfied before the consent can operate (the relevant matters), and (b) other conditions.

(3) A consent authority may specify the period within which the applicant must produce evidence to the consent authority to enable it to be satisfied about the relevant matters.

(4) If the applicant produces evidence in accordance with this section, the consent authority must notify the applicant whether it is satisfied about the relevant matters.

(5) If the consent authority does not notify the applicant within 28 days after the applicant produces the evidence, the consent authority is taken to have notified the applicant, on the day on which the period expires, that it is not satisfied about the relevant matters.

Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW)

Section 59 states:

"If an Act or instrument confers or imposes a function on any person or body, the function may be exercised (or, in the case of a duty, is required to be exercised) from time to time as occasion requires."

C. Elaboration

The situation described above raises several critical legal points under NSW planning law:

Satisfaction of Deferred Commencement Conditions

Under Section 4.16(3) of the EP&A Act, a deferred commencement consent requires the applicant to satisfy the consent authority as to specified matters before the consent becomes operative. In your case, the submission of a deed of agreement to Erin Murphy, a council officer, could be construed as an attempt to satisfy this condition.

The EP&A Regulation, in Clause 76(4), mandates that if an applicant produces evidence in accordance with the deferred commencement condition, the consent authority must notify the applicant whether it is satisfied about the relevant matters. The council's failure to respond to the submitted deed of agreement for four years appears to be a clear breach of this regulatory requirement.




.