Byron Shire Council v Vigden C J & Donna's Beach Pty Limited [1999] NSWLEC 285

Byron Shire Council v Vigden C J & Donna's Beach Pty Limited [1999] NSWLEC 285

Although the prosecutor's submission that s 52 only permits a costs order after a hearing of a charge had no merit, the Court had already held that it was functus officio in relation to the notice of motion. Because making a costs order would itself be an exercise of jurisdiction, and the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 contains no equivalent to statutes expressly permitting costs orders in matters dismissed for want of jurisdiction, the Court lacked jurisdiction to order costs of the notice of motion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 December 1999
Procedural Posture
Summary Criminal Proceedings; Application for Costs / Costs of Notice of Motion Filed After Proceedings Were Dismissed and the Court Held It Was Functus Officio
Outcome
No order for costs in respect of the notice of motion filed on 16 June 1999.
Legal Topics
['land and Environment Court Jurisdiction' 'functus Officio' 'costs in Criminal Proceedings' 'stated Case to the Court of Criminal Appeal' 'permanent Stay of Proceedings']
['environmental Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'costs' 'jurisdiction'] ['land and Environment Court Jurisdiction' 'functus Officio' 'costs in Criminal Proceedings' 'stated Case to the Court of Criminal Appeal' 'permanent Stay of Proceedings']

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

Summary Criminal Proceedings; Application for Costs / Costs of Notice of Motion Filed After Proceedings Were Dismissed and the Court Held It Was Functus Officio

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Land and Environment Court had power under s 52 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to award costs of the notice of motion.' 'Whether, after the prior dismissal of the proceedings and the finding that the Court was functus officio, the Court had jurisdiction to make a costs order.' 'Whether s 52 required an order dismissing a charge to be made only following a hearing of the charge.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the prosecutor's submission that s 52 only permits a costs order after a hearing of a charge had no merit, the Court had already held that it was functus officio in relation to the notice of motion. Because making a costs order would itself be an exercise of jurisdiction, and the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 contains no equivalent to statutes expressly permitting costs orders in matters dismissed for want of jurisdiction, the Court lacked jurisdiction to order costs of the notice of motion.

Court Disposition

No order for costs in respect of the notice of motion filed on 16 June 1999.

Orders

  • ['The Court makes no order for costs in respect of the notice of motion filed on 16 June 1999.']