868 Architects Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2026] NSWLEC 1232

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPEAL — conciliation conference — agreement between the parties — orders Land and Environment Court New South Wales Amendment notes Medium Neutral Citation: 868 Architects Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2026] NSWLEC 1232 Hearing dates: Conciliation Conference on 16 March 2025 Date of orders: 05 May 2026 Decision date: 05 May 2026 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Kullen AC Decision: The Court orders that: (1) The appeal is upheld. (2) Development consent is granted to Development Application DA 25/0380 as amended for the demolition of existing structures, tree removal and the construction of 2 dwelling houses on 2 existing lots, each with basement parking, a swimming pool and associated landscaping at Lot 37A in Deposited Plan 963839 and Lot 36A in Deposited Plan 961675 also known as 24-26 Glaisher Parade, Cronulla , 2230 , NSW, subject to the conditions of consent at Annexure A. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPEAL — conciliation conference — agreement between the parties — orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 4.15, 4.16, 4.17, 8.7, Pt 4, Sch 1, Div 2, cl 7 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), ss 34, 34AA Local Land Services Act 2013 (NSW), s 60O Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW), s 38 , Sch 7 Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 , cll 2.2, 2.3, 2.7, 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 6.1, 6.2, 6.4 , 6.7 , 6.9, 6.14, 6.16, 6.17 State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, Ch 2 , s 2.3 State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, Ch 2, 4, s s 2.4, 2.10, 2.11, 2.12, 2.13, 4.6 State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2022 Texts Cited: Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan 2015 Sutherland Shire Council, Stormwater Management (Sutherland Shire Environmental Specification 2025) (13 October 2025) Category: Principal judgment Parties: 868 Architects Pty Ltd (Applicant) Sutherland Shire Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: D Loether (Solicitor) (Applicant) J Amy (Solicitor) (Respondent) Solicitor: Bartier Perry (Applicant) Sutherland Shire Council (Respondent) File Number(s): 2025/366858 Publication restriction: Nil Judgment COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) ( EPA Act) against t he refusal by Sutherland Shire Council of development application DA 25/0380 ( the DA) for land at 24-26 Glaisher Parade, Cronulla, 2230, NSW, legally known as Lots 36A in DP 961675 and 37A in DP 963839 (the site). The DA s ought consent for the demolition of existing structures, tree removal and the construction of 2 dwelling houses on 2 existing lots, each with basement parking, a swimming pool and associated landscaping . The DA was lodged with the Respondent o n 21 July 202 5 . On 24 September 202 5 , the Applicant filed Class 1 proceedings with the Court . The Respondent filed its Statement of Facts and Contentions (SOFAC) with the Court on 2 0 October 202 5 . On 21 October 2025 the DA was refused by the Respondent under delegated authority. On 14 November 2025, the Applicant provided amended plans and supporting documents to the Respondent in response to the SOFAC . On 17 December 2025 the parties participated in a without prejudice meeting to discuss the amended materials. On 15 January 2026, Council provided detailed feedback in relation to the Applicant ’ s without prejudice bundle of amended materials of 14 November 2025 . On 5 February 2026, the Applicant provided further amended plans and supporting documents in response to SOFAC to the Respondent. The parties filed with the Court a Joint Expert Engineering Report on 27 February 2026, a Joint Expert Planning Report on 2 March 2026, and a Joint Expert Arboriculture Report on 4 March 2026. On 11 March 2026, further amended documents were provided by the Applicant to the Respondent. On 12 March 2026 the Applicant filed a Notice of Motion seeking leave of the Court to amend the DA. The Court made an order that this N otice of M otion be heard on 17 March 2026. As the parties reached a s 34 agreement prior to that date, based on the further amended plans, the Notice of Motion was withdrawn. The Respondent advised that one submission had been received in response to the notification of the DA , raising the issues of the proposed height of building, loss of views and loss of on-street parking. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34 AA( 2) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 16 March 202 6 , commencing with an on-site view . I presided over the conciliation conference . The submitter w as not present at the on-site view . A t the on-site view , the parties confirmed that they had reach ed a s 34 a greement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties . Accordingly, the hearing was adjourned, and the matter proceeded under s 34 of the LEC Act. The parties reached a final s 34 agreement on 1 6 March 202 6 . This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal and granting development consent to the further amended DA, subject to conditions , as agreed by the parties. The initial s 34 agreement and Annexure A, with the further amended plans, was filed with the Court on 16 March 2026. A revised final s 34 agreement was filed with the Court subsequently later on 16 March 2026. The s 34 agreement was supported by an agreed statement of jurisdictional prerequisites provided to the Court on 1 6 March 202 6 . T he parties advise that they agree that all contentions raised in the SOFAC and the concerns raised by the submitter have been address ed by the a mended DA and the proposed conditions of consent. T he further amended DA provides amended architectural , engineering and landscape plan s which include the followin g : Architectural Plans; Driveway Compliance Certificate; Landscape Plans; SOFAC Response Document; Schedule of Changes; TRAQ Assessment; Tree Removal Statement ; Waterway Montage; Arborist Report; Stormwater Plans; and DRAINS Modelling. Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties ’ decision if the parties ’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions . In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to, and have not, made any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties. The parties ’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.16 of the EPA Act to grant consent to the further amended DA . There are jurisdictional prerequisites that must be satisfied before this function can be exercised. The parties have identified and explained how the jurisdictional prerequisites of relevance have been satisfied in a written submission accompanying the s 34 agreement, and those requirements have been satisfied as follows. Jurisdictional Prerequisites Owner’s consent The parties advise that t he Applicant has standing to commence these proceedings under s 8.7 of the EPA Act as the Applicant on DA form DA25/0380, lodged with the respondent on 21 July 2025 . The DA was lodged by 868 Architects Pty Ltd , on behalf of the owners of the site. Community Participation (Sch 1, Div 2, cl 7(1) EPA Act) The original DA was publicly notified from 2 3 J uly 2025 to 8 August 2025 . The Respondent advised that one submission w as received during th is notification period. The parties advise that the submission has been taken into consideration when assessing the further amended DA. Conditions The s 34 agreement includes the imposition of conditions which are imposed under s 4.17(1) of the EPA Act. Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 The Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 20 15 (the LEP) applies to the site and to the proposed development. T he site is zoned C4 Environmental Living Zone ( C4 zone) pursuant to cl 2.2 of the LEP; and The proposed development for the purpose of dwelling house s is permissible with consent within the C 4 zone; I am satisfied that the proposed development is consistent with the objectives for development at cl 2.3 of the LEP within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out . Clause 2.7 of the LEP provides that demolition is permissible with consent. The further amended DA seeks consent for demolition works associated with the construction of the proposed residential dwelling s and ancillary structures . The proposed development does not include subdivision of the site, hence the Pt 4 Principal development standards relating to subdivision in the LEP do not apply. Clause 4.3 of the LEP establishes a maximum building height of 8.5 metres for the site . The parties advise that the further amended DA achieves a maximum building height of 8. 5m and thus complies with cl 4.3 of the LEP. The site is subject to cl 4.4 of the LEP in relation to the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of 0. 5 : 1 as shown in the F SR Map in the LEP . The parties advise that the further amended DA achieves a gross floor area of 328.7m 2 for 24 Glaisher Parade, and 340.5m 2 for 26 Glaisher Parade, which is compliant with cl 4.4A(2) of the LEP . Clause 6.1 of the LEP relates to Acid sulfate soils. The parties advise that that the proposed works are not below 5 metres AHD or do not involve works which will lower the water table below 1 metre AHD . As the proposed works are well above the water level the parties agree a soil management plan is not deemed necessary as the likelihood of the proposed development causing disruption, exposure, or drainage of acid sulfate soils leading to environmental harm is unlikely . Clause 6.2 of the LEP relates to Earthworks. The parties advise that t he y agree that: The extent of excavation proposed will not have a bearing on tree retention nor the structural adequacy of neighbouring properties given the setbacks proposed and the features of surrounding land; The updated Geotechnical report behind confirms that no groundwater dewatering is expected to be required; Appropriate conditions will be implemented to ensure the structural integrity of adjacent buildings is not compromised; Sediment and erosion controls will be implemented to ensure no sediment enters nearby waterways or drainage infrastructure; and The consent authority can be satisfied that the matters set out in cl 6.2(3) of the LEP have been sufficiently considered and that the proposed development will not have a detrimental impact on environmental functions and processes, neighbouring uses, or surrounding land . Clause 6. 4 of the LEP relates to Stormwater management. The parties advise that : The stormwater design utilises a pit and pump system and 1m wide inter - allotment drainage easement burdening 26 Glaisher Parade and benefitting 24 Glaisher Parade to connect to the existing stormwater line within Ischia Street ; and The parties agree the stormwater plans are acceptable and satisfy cl 6.4 of the LEP and Council ’ s Stormwater Policy 2025. Clause 6.7 of the L EP relates to Environmentally sensitive land – riparian land and watercourses and aims to ensure the protection and long ‑ term health of riparian land and watercourses by maintaining water quality, preserving the stability of watercourse beds and banks, safeguarding aquatic and riparian habitats, and supporting the ecological processes that operate within these environments . The parties advise that the consent authority can be satisfied that the matters set out in cl 6 .7 of the LEP have been sufficiently considered and that the works associated with the proposed development are located well above the adjacent waterway and will not impact on any sensitive riparian land. Clause 6.9 of the LEP relates to Limited development on foreshore area and aims to ensure that development within the foreshore area protects and enhance s natural features and endemic vegetation, support s restoration and revegetation to improve estuarine habitats, and maintain s or improve s water quality by minimising harmful runoff . Clause 6.9 of the LEP also promotes public access to the intertidal zone where environmentally feasible, requires development to minimise visual and physical impacts through sensitive design and minimal landform alteration, and ensures an appropriate balance between private development opportunities and the public ’ s enjoyment of waterways, including preserving water views from public land . The parties advise that: The proposed development does not comprise works below the foreshore building line, other than landscaping, which is permissible below the foreshore building line, as identified by a surveyed blue line on the architectural plans; and The consent authority can be satisfied that the matters set out in cl 6.9 of the LEP have been sufficiently considered and that the proposed development will not have a detrimental impact on the foreshore area. Clause 6.14 of the LEP relates to landscaped areas and provides objectives and controls to ensure the adequate provision of vegetation to minimise urban run-off, minimise the visual impact of developments and minimise heat retention in surfaces. The parties advise that cl 6.14 of the LEP requires the proposed development to provide a minimum landscaped area of 40 % of the s ite area . The parties advise that: The further amended DA proposes to provide 266.5m 2 of landscaped area for 24 Glaisher Parade , equating to 40 % of the s ite area ; The further amended DA proposes to provide 2 75.1m 2 of landscaped area for 26 Glaisher Parade, equating to 4 0 . 2 % of the s ite area ; and The consent authority can be satisfied of the matters set out in cl 6.14 as the proposed development provides sufficient landscaping achieving the objectives set out in cl 6.14 of the LEP. Clauses 6.16 and 6.17 of the LEP relate to general, and residential accommodation urban design . The parties agree that the proposed development satisfies the requirements of cll 6.16(1) and 6.17 of the LEP. State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021 Chapter 2 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021 (the Biodiversity SEPP ) details provisions regarding the preservation and management of vegetation in non-rural areas and applies to the site p ursuant to s 2.3(1)(a) of the Biodiversity SE PP . The parties agree that the proposed development will achieve the retention of contributory trees across the s ite , supplemented with further planting. I t is noted that a permit or approval to clear vegetation is not required under Ch 2 of the Biodiversity SEPP if it is clearing of a kind that is authorised under section 60O of the Local Land Services Act 2013 (NSW) , which includes clearing authorised by a development consent under Pt 4 of the EPA Act . State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 The parties advise that Ch 2 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 (the Resilience SEPP) applies to the land as the site is mapped as being within both the ‘ Coastal Environment Area ’ and ’ the ‘ Coastal Use Area ’ pursuant to s 2.4 of the Resilience SEPP. Section s 2.10 and 2.11 of the Resilience SEPP set out matters that the consent authority must consider and be satisfied of, prior to granting development consent . The parties advise that: The matters in s 2.10(1) of the Resilience SEPP have been considered, and the parties agree that by virtue of its siting, scale and nature, the consent authority can be satisfied that the proposed development is unlikely to cause an adverse impact on any safe access, views from neighbouring sites, and visual amenity and scenic qualities of, the coastal area; The matters in s 2.11(1)(a) of the Resilience SEPP have been considered and the parties agree that the consent authority can be satisfied that the proposed development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid an adverse impact referred to in s 2.11(a) of the Resilience SEPP; Section 2.12 of the Resilience SEPP requires that development consent must not be granted to development on land within the coastal zone unless the consent authority is satisfied that the proposed development is not likely to cause increased risk of coastal hazards on that land or other land . The parties agree that the proposed development, in particular the proposed landscape measures ensure that the proposed development will not result in any increased risk to significant coastal rock outcrop, including any adverse biophysical, ecological or hydrological impacts ; Section 2.13 of the Resilience SEPP requires that d evelopment consent must not be granted to development on land within the coastal zone unless the consent authority has taken into consideration the relevant provisions of any certified coastal management program that applies to the land. There is no coastal management program applying to the site; and The matters in ss 2.12 and 2.13 of the Resilience SEPP have been considered and the parties agree that the consent authority can be satisfied that the proposed development is will not have an adverse impact on the coastal zone. Section 4.6 of the Resilience SEPP requires that a consent authority must not grant consent to any development on the land unless it has considered whether a site is contaminated or potentially contaminated land, and if it is, that it is satisfied that the land is suitable (or will be suitable after undergoing remediation) for the proposed use. The parties advise that: The p ropos ed development relates to construction of new dwellings located within an area that has a long residential history, no historical uses that are associated with land contamination have been identified or known to have been located at the site; and Having regard to the site ’ s historical use for residential purposes, the absence of any information indicating potential contamination of the site and the absence of any significant excavation, there is no evidence to suggest that either the site or surrounding land would be affected by soil contamination . The Court is satisfied for the purposes of s 4.6 of the Resilience SEPP that the site can be made suitable for the proposed development. State Environmental Planning Policy ( Sustainable Buildings ) 20 22 T he p roposed d evelopment falls within the meaning of a BASIX affected building in accordance with Sch 7 of the E nvironmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW) . The parties advise that the further amended DA is supported by BASIX Certificate 1801675M (prepared by House Energy Certified dated 26 June 2025 ) which confirms that the proposed development satisfies relevant water and energy targets and thermal performance. Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan 2015 T he parties advise that the further amended DA demonstrates general compliance with the relevant controls of the Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan 2015. Conclusion Having considered the advice of the parties provided above at [ 21 ]-[ 51 ], I am satisfied that: T he A pplicant ’ s further amended DA can be approved having regard to the matters in s s 4.15(1)(b) – (e) of the EPA Act ; T he jurisdictional prerequisites on which I must be satisfied before I can exercise the power under s 4.16 of the EPA Act have been satisfied; and A pproval of the proposed development is in the public interest. Further, I am satisfied that the parties ’ decision is one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, as required by s 34(3) of the LEC Act. As the parties ’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, I am required under s 34(3) of the LEC Act to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties ’ decision. Notes The Court notes: T hat Sutherland Shire C ouncil, as the relevant consent authority, pursuant to s 38(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW) , has approved the application for an amendment to development application DA 25/0380 made on 16 March 202 6 to rely on the amended plans and documents specified below: Tab Document Date 1. Architectural Plans, prepared by 868 Architects Drawing No. Drawing Title Revision DA00 Cover Page 15 23/02/2026 DA01 Site Analysis 15 23/02/2026 DA02 General Notes & Specifications 15 23/02/2026 DA03 BASIX Requirements 15 23/02/2026 DA04 BASIX Requirements 15 23/02/2026 DA05 Streetscape Analysis 8 23/02/2026 DA06 Tree Impact Analysis 6 03/03/2026 DA10 Site Overview Plan 15 23/02/2026 DA11 Site Plan 15 23/02/2026 DA12 Basement Floor Plan 15 23/02/2026 DA13 Ground Floor Plan 15 23/02/2026 DA14 First Floor Plan 15 23/02/2026 DA20 Elevations (Residence A) 15 23/02/2026 DA21 Elevations (Residence A) 15 23/02/2026 DA22 Elevations (Residence B) 15 23/02/2026 DA23 Elevations (Residence B) 15 23/02/2026 DA30 Sections (Residence A) 15 23/02/2026 DA31 Sections (Residence A) 15 23/02/2026 DA32 Sections (Residence B) 15 23/02/2026 DA33 Sections (Residence B) 15 23/02/2026 DA34 Longitudinal Driveway Sections 15 23/02/2026 DA40 Shadow Diagrams – Summer (Existing) 15 23/02/2026 DA41 Shadow Diagrams – Summer (Proposed) 15 23/02/2026 DA42 Shadow Diagrams –Winter (Existing) 15 23/02/2026 DA43 Shadow Diagrams –Winter (Proposed) 15 23/02/2026 DA44 Shadow Diagrams –Equinox (Existing) 15 23/02/2026 DA45 Shadow Diagrams –Equinox (Proposed) 15 23/02/2026 DA46 Sun Eye Diagram - Winter 15 23/02/2026 DA50 External Finishes Schedule (Residence A) 15 23/02/2026 DA51 External Finished Schedule (Residence B) 15 23/02/2026 DA52 Waterway Photomontage 15 23/02/2026 DA53 Construction and Waste Management 15 23/02/2026 DA54 Demolition Plan 15 23/02/2026 DA55 GFA and Landscape Calculations 15 23/02/2026 DA56 Pool Plan (Residence A) 15 23/02/2026 DA57 Pool Plan (Residence B) 15 23/02/2026 DA58 Building Height Blanket Diagram 15 23/02/2026 DA59 Front Fence Details 15 23/02/2026 DA60 Basement Outline Plan 14 04/02/2026 DA61 Excavation and Fill Plan 14 04/02/2026 DA62 Privacy Screen Detail 8 23/02/2026 2. Landscape Plans, prepared by Sitedesign Studios Sydney South Drawing No Drawing Title Revision L-00 Cover Sheet F 25/02/2026 L-02 Dwelling B: Ground Plan 1/2 F 25/02/2026 L-03 Dwelling B: Level 1 Plan 1/2 F 25/02/2026 L-04 Dwelling B: Ground Plan 2/2 F 25/02/2026 L-05 Dwelling B: Level 1 Plan 2/2 F 25/02/2026 L-07 Dwelling A: Ground Plan 1/2 F 25/02/2026 L-08 Dwelling A: Level 1 Plan 1/2 F 25/02/2026 L-09 Dwelling A: Ground Plan 2/2 F 25/02/2026 L-10 Dwelling A: Level 1 Plan 2/2 F 25/02/2026 L-11 Existing Tree F 25/02/2026 L-12 Plant Schedule F 25/02/2026 L-13 Notes F 25/02/2026 L-14 Specification F 25/02/2026 3. Stormwater Plans, prepared by AE Consulting Engineers in relation to 24 Glaisher Parade, Cronulla Drawing No Drawing Title Revision SW00 Cover sheet, notes and drawing schedule F 05/02/2026 SW10 Stormwater drainage plan - basement floor level F 05/02/2026 SW20 Stormwater drainage plan - ground floor level F 05/02/2026 SW30 Stormwater drainage plan - first floor level F 05/02/2026 SW40 Stormwater drainage plan - roof level F 05/02/2026 SW50 Stormwater drainage plan - connection to council system F 05/02/2026 SW60 Erosion & sediment control details F 05/02/2026 SW70 Stormwater sections and details sheet 1 F 05/02/2026 SW80 Stormwater sections and details sheet 2 F 05/02/2026 SW90 Stormwater sections and details sheet 3 F 05/02/2026 SW100 Stormwater sections and details sheet 4 F 05/02/2026 4. Stormwater Plans, prepared by AE Consulting Engineers in relation to 26 Glaisher Parade, Cronulla Drawing No Drawing Title Revision SW00 Cover sheet, notes and drawing schedule F 05/02/2026 SW10 Stormwater drainage plan - basement floor level F 05/02/2026 SW20 Stormwater drainage plan - ground floor level F 05/02/2026 SW30 Stormwater drainage plan - first floor level F 05/02/2026 SW40 Stormwater drainage plan - roof level F 05/02/2026 SW50 Stormwater drainage plan - connection to council system F 05/02/2026 SW60 Erosion & sediment control details F 05/02/2026 SW70 Stormwater sections and details sheet 1 F 05/02/2026 SW80 Stormwater sections and details sheet 2 F 05/02/2026 SW90 Stormwater sections and details sheet 3 F 05/02/2026 SW100 Stormwater sections and details sheet 4 F 05/02/2026 5. Swept Path Analysis prepared by Park Transit Parking & Traffic Design: Drawing No Drawing Title Revision PT24_26GPV12 B99 Vehicle Type Entering Residence B - 10/11/2025 PT24_26GPV13 B99 Vehicle Type Exiting Residence B - 10/11/2025 PT24_26GPV14 B85 Vehicle Type Entering Parking Space in R(B) - 10/11/2025 PT24_26GPV15 B85 Vehicle Type Exiting Parking Space 1 in R(B) - 10/11/2025 PT24_26GPV16 Stormwater drainage plan - roof level - 10/11/2025 PT24_26GPV17 B85 Vehicle Type Existing Parking Space 2 in R(B) - 10/11/2025 PT24_26GPV12 B99 Vehicle Type Entering Residence B - 13/06/2025 PT24_26GPV13 B99 Vehicle Type Exiting Residence B - 13/06/2025 PT24_26GPV14 B85 Vehicle Type Entering Parking Space in R(B) - 13/06/2025 PT24_26GPV15 B85 Vehicle Type Exiting Parking Space 1 in R(B) - 13/06/2025 PT24_26GPV16 Stormwater drainage plan - roof level - 13/06/2025 PT24_26GPV17 B85 Vehicle Type Existing Parking Space 2 in R(B) - 13/06/2025 6. Structural Advice Letter prepared by MAC Engineers Pty Ltd 10/11/2025 7. Arboricultural Tree Report prepared by Jacksons Nature Works 24/11/2025 8. Geotechnical Report prepared by A.E Consulting Engineers prepared in or about November 2025 -/11/2025 9. Driveway Compliance Certificate prepared by Park Transit Parking & Traffic Design 29/01/2026 10. Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report prepared by Jacksons Nature Works 4/02/2026 11. 3D Survey of Trees 5 and 6 by Austrea 26/02/2026 12. Tree removal statement - Orders T he Court orders that: The appeal is upheld. Development consent is granted to Development Application DA 25/0380 as amended for the demolition of existing structures, tree removal and the construction of 2 dwelling houses on 2 existing lots, each with basement parking, a swimming pool and associated landscaping at Lot 37A in Deposited Plan 963839 and Lot 36A in Deposited Plan 961675 also known as 24-26 Glaisher Parade, Cronulla , 2230 , NSW, subject to the conditions of consent at Annexure A. G Kullen Acting Commissioner of the Court ********** Annexure A (552 KB, pdf) Amendments 05 May 2026 - Formatting amended. DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 05 May 2026