//
[2025] NSWLEC 1843
General information, not legal advice.
Land and Environment Court (NSW)
2025-12-05
Espinosa C
Original judgment source is linked above.
Zoe will write a short plain-English brief of this judgment and email it to you: what it was about, what the court decided and why. It can take up to a minute.
General information, not legal advice.
Or create a free account to save it and ask Zoe follow-up questions.
Source: NSW Caselaw (www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au). Converted to plain text by ZoeLaw. Not the official version.
Medium Neutral Citation: Awad v Cumberland Council [2025] NSWLEC 1843
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference held on 27 November 2025
Date of orders: 05 December 2025
Decision date: 05 December 2025
Jurisdiction: Class 1
Before: Espinosa C
Decision: The Court orders:
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT CONTROL ORDER APPEAL – unauthorised works - demolish works order – restore works order - conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – modified order – orders
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), s 8.18
Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 34
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Joseph Awad (First Applicant)
Dyala Salloum (Second Applicant)
Cumberland Council (Respondent)
Representation: Counsel:
J Awad (Self Represented and agent for Second Applicant)
C McFadzean (Solicitor)(Respondent)
Solicitors:
Cumberland Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2025/362356
Publication restriction: No
COMMISSIONER: This is a Class 1 Development Control Order Appeal pursuant to s 8.18 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EPA Act) being an appeal against the Development Control Order ON2025/0237 issued to the Applicants including a Demolish Works Order (Order 3) and a Restore Works Order (Order 10) (DCO) at 265 Fowler Road, Guildford West legally described as Lot 139 in DP 10981 (the Site).
The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) (LEC Act) between the parties, which has been held on 27 November 2025. I presided over the conciliation conference.
At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal and modifying the DCO.
The First Applicant attended the conciliation conference in person and during the conciliation conference the Second Applicant appeared via video call and confirmed her agreement to the terms of the modified DCO and authorised the First Applicant to sign the s 34 Agreement as her agent.
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 8.18(4)(b) of the EPA Act to modify a DCO.
There are jurisdictional prerequisites that must be satisfied before this function can be exercised being the terms of s 8.18(4) of the EPA Act which provides as follows:
(4) On hearing an appeal, the Court may—
(a) revoke the development control order, or
(b) modify the development control order, or
(c) substitute for the development control order any other order that the relevant enforcement authority who gave the order could have given, or
(d) find that the development control order is sufficiently complied with, or
(e) make such order with respect to compliance with the development control order as the Court thinks fit, or
(f) make such other order with respect to the development control order as the Court thinks fit.
The Court orders:
The appeal is upheld.
Order No 2025/0237 is modified in the form attached and marked with the letter ‘A’.
**********
Awad
Cumberland Council [2025] NSWLEC 1843