Housing & planning · Woollahra Municipal Council
Woollahra seeks urgent legal advice on 160 Oxford Street approval
Council has asked its general manager to urgently examine possible court action over the Minister’s delegate’s approval of the Paddington State Significant Development.
Reporting from draft minutes. Recorded wording may change when confirmed. How this article was prepared
More than 330 objections to a development at 160 Oxford Street, Paddington, were recorded by Woollahra Council, which resolved to seek urgent legal advice on whether the approval can be challenged or works temporarily halted, according to unconfirmed minutes of its 26 October meeting.
The objections raised concerns about the project’s height, bulk and scale, heritage and amenity impacts, its transition to the surrounding heritage conservation area, the loss of affordable housing, excavation and parking provisions, according to the minutes.
The development consent was granted on 24 September 2026 by the Deputy Planning Secretary, acting as the Minister’s delegate. Council recorded that the State Significant Development approval process does not provide a merit-based appeal or review mechanism, and noted two recent court decisions.
Council resolved that the General Manager obtain legal advice on options to challenge the approval, including whether its progress or the commencement of works could be stayed pending the outcome of any legal proceedings, including consideration of injunctive relief. The resolution also asks for the advice to be expedited and reported to councillors with regard to any applicable limitation period.
The unconfirmed minutes record the resolution as carried, with a 10-0 division. The council had entered closed session to consider confidential legal correspondence before returning to open session.
The minutes do not record that court proceedings have been filed, an injunction has been sought or works have started. Any challenge therefore remains a possible next step, rather than an outcome recorded at the meeting.
What deserves a closer look
The recorded action is a request for legal advice about possible proceedings, not a recorded legal challenge or injunction.
The consent was granted by the Minister's delegate, while Woollahra Council's recorded role was to consider possible options for challenging it.
The record does not expressly establish that the objections caused the decision to obtain legal advice.
Questions for follow-up reporting
What options did the requested legal advice identify?
Did Woollahra Council later file proceedings or seek injunctive relief before any applicable limitation period expired?
Has work begun at 160 Oxford Street since the 24 September consent?
What happens next
Under the adopted resolution, the General Manager is to obtain urgent legal advice on options to challenge the decision, including a possible stay or injunctive relief.
The resolution directs that the advice be expedited and reported to councillors, having regard to any applicable limitation period.
Check the record
These passages were matched to the source text. Read them in context in the original minutes.
The record is labelled unconfirmed minutes of Woollahra Municipal Council's Ordinary Council Meeting held on 26 October 2026.
Ordinary Council Monday, 26 October 2026 6:30 PM Minutes Unconfirmed Woollahra Municipal Council Ordinary Council 26 October 2026 Page | 2 Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes of the Meeting of Ordinary Council held at the Council Chambers, 536 New South Head Road, Double Bay, on 26 October 2026 at 6:30 PM.
Document title and meeting details
Open original minutes ↗The minutes record that the Deputy Planning Secretary, acting as the Minister's delegate, granted development consent for the State Significant Development at 160 Oxford Street, Paddington, on 24 September 2026.
Notes: 1. That on 24 September 2026, the Deputy Planning Secretary, acting as the Minister's delegate, granted development consent for the State Significant Development (SSD) at 160 Oxford Street, Paddington (the Decision).
Item 15.3, resolution 702/2026, part A.1
Open original minutes ↗The minutes record more than 330 community objections during exhibition concerning height, bulk and scale, heritage and amenity impacts, transition to the surrounding heritage conservation area, loss of affordable housing, excessive excavation and parking provisions.
2. That during the exhibition period, members of the community lodged more than 330 objections, regarding the development's height, bulk and scale, heritage and amenity impacts, its transition to the surrounding heritage conservation area as well as concerns about the loss of affordable housing and excessive excavation and parking provisions.
Item 15.3, resolution 702/2026, part A.2
Open original minutes ↗Council resolved that the General Manager urgently obtain legal advice on options to challenge the decision, including a possible stay pending the outcome of any legal proceedings and consideration of injunctive relief, and expedite reporting that advice to councillors with regard to any applicable limitation period.
5. Community concerns regarding marketing and promotion of the development approval as a "40 residence project ... 10-storey building". B. Resolves that: 1. The General Manager obtain, as a matter of urgency, legal advice on options to challenge the Decision, including whether it is possible to 'stay' the progress of the development approval and the commencement of any works, pending the outcome of any legal proceedings (including consideration of obtaining injunctive relief). 2. The General Manager expedites the obtaining of legal advice and report it to Councillors as soon as possible, having regard to any applicable limitation period. The Motion was put and Carried.
Item 15.3, resolution 702/2026, parts B.1–B.2 and motion outcome
Open original minutes ↗Council recorded that the SSD approval process does not provide a merit-based appeal or review mechanism and noted two recent court decisions.
3. That SSD approval process does not provide for a merit-based appeal or review mechanism. 4. Recent Court decisions, including Prosker Pty Ltd v Mosman Municipal Council NSWLEC 1648 and Aesthete No 15 Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Gold Coast QCA 136.
Item 15.3, resolution 702/2026, parts A.3–A.4
Open original minutes ↗The recorded division lists ten councillors for the motion and none against, and states a 10-0 result.
Note:In accordance with Council's Code of Meeting Practice a Division of votes is recorded on this matter. For the MotionAgainst the Motion Councillor Ardouin, Councillor Dixson, Councillor Jarvis, Councillor Mitchell, Councillor Parmegiani, Councillor Price, Councillor Regan, Councillor Robertson, Councillor Torsten, Councillor Woodgate None 10/0 Unconfirmed Woollahra Municipal Council Ordinary Council 26 October 2026 Page | 24 15.4.
Item 15.3, division on resolution 702/2026
Open original minutes ↗The minutes record that Council entered closed session and returned to open session; the closed session concerned confidential late correspondence containing litigation advice or legally privileged advice.
15.3. 160 Oxford Street, Paddington Note: Councillor Silcocks left the meeting during this item, the time being 8:00pm. Note: The Council, in accordance with clause 14.1 of Council's Code of Meeting Practice, entered Closed Session, the time being 8:04pm. Note: The Council returned to Open Session, the time being 8:14pm. (Councillor Price/Councillor Dixson) 695/2026 Resolved: THAT Council in accordance with clause 14.1 of Council's Code of Meeting Practice, resolve to enter into Closed Session with the press and public excluded to consider the confidential late correspondence in relation to this matter. These matters are to be considered in Closed Session as per section 10A (2) (g) of the Act, as the information contains advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.
Item 15.3, closed-session notes and resolution 695/2026
Open original minutes ↗Source record
Reporting from the unconfirmed public minutes of Woollahra Municipal Council’s Ordinary Council Meeting on 26 October 2026.
Key facts from the minutes
- The Deputy Planning Secretary, acting as the Minister’s delegate, granted SSD consent for 160 Oxford Street on 24 September 2026.
- Woollahra Council recorded more than 330 objections during the exhibition period.
- The objections covered height, bulk and scale, heritage and amenity, the surrounding heritage conservation area, affordable housing, excavation and parking.
- Council resolved to obtain urgent legal advice on challenging the approval, including a possible stay or injunctive relief.
- The unconfirmed minutes record the resolution as carried with a 10-0 division.
Why it matters
- The project has drawn substantial recorded opposition in Paddington, while any court challenge remains a possible next step. The minutes record a request for advice about possible court action, not a challenge, injunction or halt to construction.