Jeray v Blue Mountains City Council (No.9) [2011] NSWLEC 123

Jeray v Blue Mountains City Council (No.9) [2011] NSWLEC 123

The hearing dates were vacated because the way the interlocutory application was conducted left no time for the substantive hearing to be completed that week. However, the applicant had filed no evidence supporting the allegations in the Amended Notice of Motion or the substantive claim, the documents sought by discovery related to asserted facts arising after commencement and were not facts in issue in the substantive proceedings, and the circumstances did not justify the discretionary and exceptional order for discovery. There was no evidentiary basis for findings of conflict of interest, reasonable apprehension of bias, breach of model litigant obligations, or professional misconduct,...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Proceedings; Interlocutory Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Ruling on Amended Notice of Motion Filed 11 July 2011 and Vacation of Hearing Dates
Outcome
Hearing dates vacated; principal prayers in the Amended Notice of Motion refused; undertaking noted; substantive proceedings stood over for new hearing dates; costs reserved; Amended Notice of Motion otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Relief' 'discovery' 'vacation of Hearing Dates' 'model Litigant Principles' 'conflict of Interest and Apprehended Bias' 'court Directions and Case Management']
['land and Environment' 'civil Procedure' 'local Government'] ['interlocutory Relief' 'discovery' 'vacation of Hearing Dates' 'model Litigant Principles' 'conflict of Interest and Apprehended Bias' 'court Directions and Case Management']

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 Proceedings; Interlocutory Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Ruling on Amended Notice of Motion Filed 11 July 2011 and Vacation of Hearing Dates

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the hearing dates fixed for 11 to 15 July 2011 should be vacated.' 'Whether discovery should be ordered under Part 21 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 before the remaining relief in the Amended Notice of Motion was heard.' 'Whether declarations should be made that Council officers had conflicts of interest or gave rise to reasonable apprehensions of bias, and that the Council failed to act as a model litigant.' "Whether the Court had power or evidentiary basis to restrain Council's legal representatives, report alleged professional misconduct, or require the Council to take specified internal steps." 'Whether costs should be determined at this interlocutory stage.']

Ratio Decidendi

The hearing dates were vacated because the way the interlocutory application was conducted left no time for the substantive hearing to be completed that week. However, the applicant had filed no evidence supporting the allegations in the Amended Notice of Motion or the substantive claim, the documents sought by discovery related to asserted facts arising after commencement and were not facts in issue in the substantive proceedings, and the circumstances did not justify the discretionary and exceptional order for discovery. There was no evidentiary basis for findings of conflict of interest, reasonable apprehension of bias, breach of model litigant obligations, or professional misconduct,...

Court Disposition

Hearing dates vacated; principal prayers in the Amended Notice of Motion refused; undertaking noted; substantive proceedings stood over for new hearing dates; costs reserved; Amended Notice of Motion otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The Hearing dates 11 to 15 July 2011 (incl) for matter 40517 of 2010 are vacated.' "Prayers 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18 and 19 of the Applicant's Amended Notice of Motion filed 11 July 2011 are refused." "The Court notes the Respondent's undertaking to the Court in response to Prayer 20 of the Amended...