Hornsby Shire Council v The Valuer General of New South Wales [2013] NSWSC 1026

Hornsby Shire Council v The Valuer General of New South Wales [2013] NSWSC 1026

The Council failed to show real or substantial prejudice from CSR relying on the Cottier 2013 concept plan. The plan arose from the geotechnical expert conclave and related expert agreement rather than undue lateness by CSR, further expert work could be obtained in time, and the interests of justice required all issues to be determined at the final hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Procedural Ruling in Supreme Court Proceedings for Administrative Law Relief and Damages Arising From a Compensation Determination / Application by the Council for an Advance Ruling Pursuant to Section 192 a of the Evidence Act 1995 Before Final Hearing
Outcome
Application refused; costs of the application ordered to be costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['advance Ruling' 'expert Evidence' 'geotechnical Evidence' 'prejudice' 'overriding Purpose' 'residential Development Concept Plans']
['evidence' 'civil Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'land Acquisition and Valuation'] ['advance Ruling' 'expert Evidence' 'geotechnical Evidence' 'prejudice' 'overriding Purpose' 'residential Development Concept Plans']

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

Procedural Ruling in Supreme Court Proceedings for Administrative Law Relief and Damages Arising From a Compensation Determination / Application by the Council for an Advance Ruling Pursuant to Section 192 a of the Evidence Act 1995 Before Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether CSR Limited should be prevented from relying upon the expert report of Mr Keith Cottier dated 28 June 2013.' 'Whether the introduction of the 2013 Cottier concept plan was unfair or prejudicial to the Council at the stage of preparation for final hearing.' 'Whether the interests of justice required the issues raised by the further expert evidence to be determined at the hearing.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Council failed to show real or substantial prejudice from CSR relying on the Cottier 2013 concept plan. The plan arose from the geotechnical expert conclave and related expert agreement rather than undue lateness by CSR, further expert work could be obtained in time, and the interests of justice required all issues to be determined at the final hearing.

Court Disposition

Application refused; costs of the application ordered to be costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ['The application of the Hornsby Shire Council for a ruling pursuant to section 192A of the Evidence Act 1995, that the fifth defendant, CSR, not be permitted to rely upon the expert report of Mr Keith Cottier, an expert architect of Allen Jack & Cottier dated 28 June 2013, is refused.' 'The costs of this...