Carriage v Stockland Development Pty Ltd & Ors [2004] NSWLEC 211

Carriage v Stockland Development Pty Ltd & Ors [2004] NSWLEC 211

Security for costs was refused because the proceedings were regular, bona fide and properly brought by a person within the Court's jurisdiction who had a special relationship with the land; Mr Carriage was impecunious and an order for security would most likely prevent the proceedings from continuing; and the procedural fairness claim and the claim of breach of s 90 before consents were granted were arguable and had some prospects of success, while Stockland Development Pty Ltd was a substantial corporation able to defend the proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs in Proceedings Challenging Consents Permitting Damage and Destruction of Aboriginal Artefacts / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application for security for costs dismissed.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'procedural Fairness' 'aboriginal Artefacts' 'integrated Development' 'standing' 'impecunious Applicant' 'prospects of Success']
['practice and Procedure' 'costs' 'environmental Law' 'aboriginal Cultural Heritage' 'administrative Law'] ['security for Costs' 'procedural Fairness' 'aboriginal Artefacts' 'integrated Development' 'standing' 'impecunious Applicant' 'prospects of Success']

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

Application for Security for Costs in Proceedings Challenging Consents Permitting Damage and Destruction of Aboriginal Artefacts / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether security for costs should be ordered against an impecunious applicant who brought proceedings concerning Aboriginal cultural heritage at Sandon Point.' "Whether the applicant's substantive claims, including denial of procedural fairness before granting consents under s 90 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NSW), were bona fide and had arguable prospects of success." 'Whether processing of development applications otherwise than as integrated development under s 91 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) affected the prospects of the proceedings.' "Whether alleged prior breaches of s 90 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NSW) and investigations into them were relevant to the Director-General's grant of consents."]

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs was refused because the proceedings were regular, bona fide and properly brought by a person within the Court's jurisdiction who had a special relationship with the land; Mr Carriage was impecunious and an order for security would most likely prevent the proceedings from continuing; and the procedural fairness claim and the claim of breach of s 90 before consents were granted were arguable and had some prospects of success, while Stockland Development Pty Ltd was a substantial corporation able to defend the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The present application is dismissed.']