Buckley & ors v May & ors [2007] NSWSC 1519

Buckley & ors v May & ors [2007] NSWSC 1519

The proceedings were expedited because significant urgency remained: the validity of the Gaming SIA and Liquor SIA should be resolved by the Court before the Licensing Court hearing, otherwise the status of any Licensing Court decision granting conditional removal would be uncertain. The inconvenience of the plaintiffs' counsel did not outweigh that urgency, particularly given the plaintiffs' late challenge to approvals made in May and June 2007.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Expedition Application in Proceedings Seeking Declarations and Injunctive Relief Concerning Approvals Connected With Conditional Removal of an Hotelier's Licence / Ex Tempore Judgment on Expedition
Outcome
Hearing expedited
Legal Topics
['expedition' "conditional Removal of Hotelier's Licence" 'gaming Social Impact Application' 'liquor Social Impact Assessment Application' 'convenience of Counsel']
['procedure' 'liquor Licensing' 'gaming and Liquor Social Impact Assessment'] ['expedition' "conditional Removal of Hotelier's Licence" 'gaming Social Impact Application' 'liquor Social Impact Assessment Application' 'convenience of Counsel']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Expedition Application in Proceedings Seeking Declarations and Injunctive Relief Concerning Approvals Connected With Conditional Removal of an Hotelier's Licence / Ex Tempore Judgment on Expedition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proceedings should be expedited before the scheduled Licensing Court hearing of the application for conditional removal.' 'Whether urgency remained after the plaintiffs withdrew the claim for an injunction restraining the Licensing Court from proceeding and indicated a likely undertaking not to seek an adjournment.' "Whether inconvenience to the plaintiffs' counsel justified refusing or delaying expedition."]

Ratio Decidendi

The proceedings were expedited because significant urgency remained: the validity of the Gaming SIA and Liquor SIA should be resolved by the Court before the Licensing Court hearing, otherwise the status of any Licensing Court decision granting conditional removal would be uncertain. The inconvenience of the plaintiffs' counsel did not outweigh that urgency, particularly given the plaintiffs' late challenge to approvals made in May and June 2007.

Court Disposition

Hearing expedited

Orders

  • ['The hearing of the proceedings be expedited.' 'The proceedings are fixed for hearing before Windeyer J on 23 November 2007 on the basis that the case will take no longer than one day.' 'Directions were made in accordance with the document entitled Directions, initialled by Brereton J, dated 16 November 2007 and...