Ajvadi v Wicks [2023] NSWLEC 145

Ajvadi v Wicks [2023] NSWLEC 145

The Court refused to adjourn or stay the proceedings because granting such relief would delay just, quick and cheap resolution and would not be justified by the circumstances; there was insufficient evidence or appropriate undertakings to address the demonstrated risk arising from the unauthorised works, and a hearing can determine the necessary remedial orders.

Parties
First Applicant: Dr Fayavar Ajvadi; Second Applicant: Dr Shohreh Rezai; First Respondent: Michael Wicks; Second Respondent: Northern Beaches Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Civil Enforcement Proceedings / Interlocutory Decision on Notice of Motion for Adjournment or Stay
Outcome
First respondent's notice of motion dismissed; directions for progression to hearing made; costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
Adjournment or Stay of Proceedings, Remedial Orders, Breach of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, Unauthorised Building Works, Procedural Directions
Environmental Law Civil Procedure Adjournment or Stay of Proceedings Remedial Orders Breach of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Unauthorised Building Works Procedural Directions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Fayavar Ajvadi

First Applicant

Dr Shohreh Rezai

Second Applicant

Michael Wicks

First Respondent

Northern Beaches Council

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Class 4 Civil Enforcement Proceedings / Interlocutory Decision on Notice of Motion for Adjournment or Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to adjourn or stay Class 4 proceedings pending determination of a development application and any subsequent appeal
  2. 2 Appropriate procedural course to resolve unauthorised works and alleged risk

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused to adjourn or stay the proceedings because granting such relief would delay just, quick and cheap resolution and would not be justified by the circumstances; there was insufficient evidence or appropriate undertakings to address the demonstrated risk arising from the unauthorised works, and a hearing can determine the necessary remedial orders.

Court Disposition

First respondent's notice of motion dismissed; directions for progression to hearing made; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • The first respondent's notice of motion is dismissed.
  • Parties to approach the Registrar by 4:00pm on Monday, 18 December 2023 to seek hearing dates no earlier than April 2024 for a duration of two days.