Leclercq v Essential Energy [2015] NSWLEC 50

Leclercq v Essential Energy [2015] NSWLEC 50

Good cause for delay was shown due to the applicants' solicitor's error, ongoing negotiations during the 90 day period, absence of prejudice to the respondent, and the fact that the delay was approximately one month. It is therefore appropriate to allow the matter to proceed to determination.

Parties
First Applicant: Roland Marcel Leclercq; Second Applicant: Rosemary Susan Leclercq; Respondent: Essential Energy
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Application to Extend Time for Compensation Appeal / Preliminary Ruling
Outcome
Application granted to extend time; matter to proceed to determination.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Good Cause for Delay, Just Terms Compensation

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roland Marcel Leclercq

First Applicant

Rosemary Susan Leclercq

Second Applicant

Essential Energy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Extend Time for Compensation Appeal / Preliminary Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have shown good cause for failure to lodge their compensation appeal within the time stipulated by s 66(1) of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW)

Ratio Decidendi

Good cause for delay was shown due to the applicants' solicitor's error, ongoing negotiations during the 90 day period, absence of prejudice to the respondent, and the fact that the delay was approximately one month. It is therefore appropriate to allow the matter to proceed to determination.

Court Disposition

Application granted to extend time; matter to proceed to determination.

Orders

  • The Court may proceed to hear and determine the Applicants' claim for compensation.