Hoy v Coffs Harbour City Council (No 2) [2015] NSWLEC 182

Hoy v Coffs Harbour City Council (No 2) [2015] NSWLEC 182

The usual and preferable approach of resolving all matters in issue, including costs, before any appeal is determined supports refusing a stay. The dictates in ss 56, 57 and 58 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) favour efficient resolution, and procedural differences in this case do not warrant departure from that approach.

Parties
Applicant: Iris May Hoy; Respondent: Coffs Harbour City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Class 3 / Notice of Motion to Stay Costs Proceedings Pending Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Applicant's Notice of Motion dismissed
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Costs, Notice of Motion, Leave to Appeal
Civil Procedure Stay of Proceedings Costs Notice of Motion Leave to Appeal

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Iris May Hoy

Applicant

Coffs Harbour City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Class 3 / Notice of Motion to Stay Costs Proceedings Pending Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to stay determination of costs in Class 3 proceedings pending resolution of leave to appeal in Court of Appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The usual and preferable approach of resolving all matters in issue, including costs, before any appeal is determined supports refusing a stay. The dictates in ss 56, 57 and 58 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) favour efficient resolution, and procedural differences in this case do not warrant departure from that approach.

Court Disposition

Applicant's Notice of Motion dismissed

Orders

  • The Applicant's Notice of Motion dated 17 November 2015 is dismissed.