Loder v Narrabri Shire Council (No 2) [2021] NSWLEC 33

Loder v Narrabri Shire Council (No 2) [2021] NSWLEC 33

Although the proceedings could on balance be characterised as public interest litigation because they clarified the operation of s 234(1)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) concerning vacation of civic office, the Applicant did not demonstrate the required "something more" to justify departure from the usual costs rule. The case was not novel, involved ordinary statutory construction, directly affected only the Applicant, did not affect a significant section of the public, and the Applicant would have obtained financial benefit if successful. Her illness and accepted apologies were personal circumstances and irrelevant to whether the litigation produced the wider benefit...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Costs Application / Costs Determination After Dismissal of the Applicant's Summons in Loder V Narrabri Shire Council [2020] NSWLEC 109
Outcome
The Applicant's application for each party to pay its own costs was refused; the Council was awarded its costs of the substantive proceedings and the costs hearing.
Legal Topics
['public Interest Litigation Costs' 'vacation of Civic Office' 'absence From Council Meetings' 'statutory Construction' 'costs Follow the Event']
['costs' 'local Government'] ['public Interest Litigation Costs' 'vacation of Civic Office' 'absence From Council Meetings' 'statutory Construction' 'costs Follow the Event']

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

Class 4 Costs Application / Costs Determination After Dismissal of the Applicant's Summons in Loder V Narrabri Shire Council [2020] NSWLEC 109

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the unsuccessful Applicant should be exempted from paying the Council's costs under r 4.2(1) of the Land and Environment Court Rules 2007 (NSW) because the proceedings were brought in the public interest." 'Whether the litigation demonstrated "something more" than public interest characterisation sufficient to depart from the usual costs rule.' 'Whether the Council should receive its costs of the costs hearing.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the proceedings could on balance be characterised as public interest litigation because they clarified the operation of s 234(1)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) concerning vacation of civic office, the Applicant did not demonstrate the required "something more" to justify departure from the usual costs rule. The case was not novel, involved ordinary statutory construction, directly affected only the Applicant, did not affect a significant section of the public, and the Applicant would have obtained financial benefit if successful. Her illness and accepted apologies were personal circumstances and irrelevant to whether the litigation produced the wider benefit...

Court Disposition

The Applicant's application for each party to pay its own costs was refused; the Council was awarded its costs of the substantive proceedings and the costs hearing.

Orders

  • ["The Applicant is to pay the Council's costs of the substantive proceedings." "The Applicant is to pay the Council's costs of the costs hearing." 'The exhibits are returned.']