Black Hill Residents Group Incorporated v Marist Youth Care Limited (No 2) [2019] NSWLEC 137

Black Hill Residents Group Incorporated v Marist Youth Care Limited (No 2) [2019] NSWLEC 137

It is appropriate to order security for costs against Black Hill Residents Group Incorporated as the evidence demonstrates it is unlikely to be able to meet an adverse costs order and there is insufficient public interest to preclude such an order under r 4.2(2) of the LEC Rules; security is set at $40,000 payable in two tranches, as this properly balances the hardship to the applicant and the legitimate protection of the respondent's interests.

Parties
Applicant: Black Hill Residents Group Incorporated; First Respondent: Marist Youth Care Limited (Trading as MARIST180); Second Respondent: Minister for Families, Communities and Disability Services
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Motion for Security for Costs in Class 4 Proceedings / Interlocutory Application (security for Costs) Prior to Final Hearing
Outcome
Security for costs ordered; notice of motion upheld
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Public Interest Proceedings, Interpretation of Environmental Planning Instruments, Impecuniosity of Applicant, Planning Law, Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Environmental Planning Administrative Law Security for Costs Public Interest Proceedings Interpretation of Environmental Planning Instruments Impecuniosity of Applicant Planning Law +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Black Hill Residents Group Incorporated

Applicant

Marist Youth Care Limited (Trading as MARIST180)

First Respondent

Minister for Families, Communities and Disability Services

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Motion for Security for Costs in Class 4 Proceedings / Interlocutory Application (security for Costs) Prior to Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against the applicant under r 42.21 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings are brought in the public interest so as to restrain a security for costs order under cl 4.2(2) of the Land and Environment Court Rules 2007 (NSW)
  3. 3 If security is to be ordered, what amount and in what form is appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

It is appropriate to order security for costs against Black Hill Residents Group Incorporated as the evidence demonstrates it is unlikely to be able to meet an adverse costs order and there is insufficient public interest to preclude such an order under r 4.2(2) of the LEC Rules; security is set at $40,000 payable in two tranches, as this properly balances the hardship to the applicant and the legitimate protection of the respondent's interests.

Court Disposition

Security for costs ordered; notice of motion upheld

Orders

  • The first respondent's notice of motion seeking security for costs is upheld.
  • Pursuant to r 42.21 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), Black Hill Residents Group Incorporated is to provide security for costs in the amount of $40,000 to Marist Youth Care Limited (Trading as MARIST180), payable in two tranches of $20,000 by 31 October 2019 and 29 November 2019 respectively, in a...