/

/

Salloum v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2026] NSWLEC 1061 | Case summary | Zoe

NSWNSWLEC

Salloum v Canterbury-Bankstown Council

[2026] NSWLEC 1061

Land and Environment Court (NSW)|2026-02-13|Before: Dickson C

View on NSW Caselaw

General information, not legal advice.

At a glance

Source facts

Court

Land and Environment Court (NSW)

Decision date

2026-02-13

Before

Dickson C

Catchwords

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – demolition and new residential dwelling
– conciliation conference – agreement between
the parties –
orders made

Source

Original judgment source is linked above.

Email me a plain-English brief of this case

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.

Catchwords

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – demolition and new residential dwelling– conciliation conference – agreement betweenthe parties –orders made

Judgment

Source: NSW Caselaw (www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au). Converted to plain text by ZoeLaw. Not the official version.

Medium Neutral Citation: Salloum v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2026] NSWLEC 1061

Hearing dates: 5 February 2026

Date of orders: 13 February 2026

Decision date: 13 February 2026

Jurisdiction: Class 1

Before: Dickson C

Decision: The Court orders:
(1) The Applicant is granted leave to rely upon the amended plans listed in paragraph [6] of the judgment.
(2) The appeal is upheld.
(3) Development Application No DA-37/2025 for the demolition of existing structures and proposed construction of a new two-storey dwelling house above basement with swimming pool, cabana, earthworks, landscaping and front fence on land known as 1 Fricourt Avenue, Earlwood NSW (Lot 312 DP14722) is determined by the grant of consent subject to conditions in Annexure A.

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – demolition and new residential dwelling – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders made

Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 4.15, 8.7
Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), ss 34, 34AA
Canterbury-Bankstown Local Environmental Plan 2023
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW), s 38 State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6 State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2022

COMMISSIONER: This appeal is lodged by Nada Salloum pursuant to s 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EPA Act) against the actual refusal of development application DA-37/2025. As amended the development application seeks consent for demolition of existing structures and proposed construction of a new two-storey dwelling house above basement with swimming pool, cabana, earthworks, landscaping and front fence. The development is proposed at 1 Fricourt Avenue, Earlwood (Lot 312 DP 14722).
A conciliation conference was held between the parties on 5 February 2026 pursuant to s 34AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) (LEC Act). I presided over the conciliation conference. At the conciliation conference the parties reached an agreement based on amended plans and documents. The parties' agreement is for the grant of consent to the application, as amended, subject to conditions. This agreement meets the first condition to the exercise of power and obligation of a commissioner to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the decision of the parties (this being the test applied by s 34(3) of the LEC Act): see McMillan v Taylor (2023) 111 NSWLR 634; [2023] NSWCA 183 (McMillan) at [51].
As the presiding Commissioner, I am satisfied that the second condition is met, that being the decision is one that the Court can make in the proper exercise of its functions: see McMillan at [51]. I form this state of satisfaction on the basis that:
The Applicant is the owner of the site and Landowners consent was provided by the owner of the land at the time of lodgement of the development application.
The development application was notified by the Respondent between 24 January and 6 February 2025. The Respondent received six submissions in objection to the development. Further, at the commencement of proceedings onsite the Court was addressed by a number of local residents who raised ongoing concerns with the development. With the assistance of the expert evidence filed in the proceedings, I am satisfied that the submissions have been considered in the determination of the development application by either amendment of the application or the imposition of conditions of consent.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2022 (Sustainable Buildings SEPP) applies to the proposed development. The development application is accompanied by a BASIX certificate in compliance with the instrument Sustainable Buildings SEPP. I am satisfied that the revisions in the amended plans do not require an updated BASIX certificate.
Section 4.6 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 (SEPP RH) requires the consent authority to consider the contamination of the land when determining the development application. The Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE) nominates that a review of historical aerial imagery that indicates that the site has had long term residential usage. Further, a Geotechnical Investigation Report that accompanies the development application notes that during the site inspection no site conditions indicated concerns and the report concludes that the site is suitable for continued residential use. On the basis of the preceding, and the annexed conditions, I can be satisfied that the land will be suitable for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out under the application.
The site is subject to the provisions of the Canterbury-Bankstown Local Environmental Plan 2023 (LEP 2023) and is zoned R2 Low Density Residential. Dwelling houses are a permissible use with consent in the zone. In determining the development application, I have considered the objectives of the R2 zone.
Demolition is permitted with consent pursuant to cl 2.7 of LEP 2023. Demolition is sought by the development application.
The development standards for building height (cl 4.3) and floor space ratio (FSR) (cl 4.4) in LEP 2023 are met by the proposed development.
The proposed development has a maximum building height of 6.917m which is located below the maximum height of 8.5m. The proposed development has an FSR of 0.48:1 which is below the FSR standard of 0.5:1.
Pursuant to cl 6.1 ‘Acid Sulfate Soils’ and the Acid Sulfate Soils Map, the site is not located within 500m of Class 1, 2, 3 or 4 land nor land which is below 5m Australian Height Datum and by which the water table is likely to be lowered below 1m. I am satisfied that the proposed development does impact on potential Acid Sulfate Soils (cl 6.1 of LEP 2023).
The proposed development includes an amended basement plan which reduces the extent of the proposed basement. As noted above the development application is accompanied by a Geotechnical Investigation Report prepared by Geosel (15 February 2025) which provides recommendations for the construction of the proposed development. Compliance with those recommendations is required by the annexed conditions of consent. Further, the amended development application is accompanied by an updated planning assessment against cl 6.2 of LEP 2023. With the assistance of these documents, and the evidence of the experts, I accept the agreement of the parties that cl 6.2 of LEP 2023 is satisfied.
In relation to required considerations at cl 6.3(3) Stormwater in LEP 2023 the development application is accompanied by stormwater engineering plans. With the assistance of the agreed evidence of the stormwater experts, I accept the agreed position of the parties that the development: