Walker v Minister for Planning [2007] NSWLEC 837

Walker v Minister for Planning [2007] NSWLEC 837

Because the applicant did not succeed on any pleaded and particularised ground before giving notice on 31 August 2007 of the amended points of claim, supported no order for costs before that date if the costs order against it were vacated, and succeeded only on one aspect of one of three discrete and severable grounds, there should be no order as to costs before 31 August 2007, the 11 September 2007 costs order against the applicant should be vacated, and the respondents should pay 70 percent of the applicant's costs from and including 31 August 2007.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Ex Tempore Judgment on Costs After Final Orders
Outcome
Costs apportioned; respondents ordered to pay 70 percent of the applicant's costs from and including 31 August 2007, no order as to earlier costs, and the prior costs order against the applicant was vacated.
Legal Topics
['apportionment of Costs' 'costs Where Applicant Partly Successful' 'amended Points of Claim' 'ecologically Sustainable Development' 'climate Change']
['civil Procedure' 'costs' 'environmental Planning Law'] ['apportionment of Costs' 'costs Where Applicant Partly Successful' 'amended Points of Claim' 'ecologically Sustainable Development' 'climate Change']

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

Costs Application / Ex Tempore Judgment on Costs After Final Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should receive costs of the proceedings after succeeding on one aspect of one of three grounds agitated at the hearing.' 'Whether there should be no order as to costs before 31 August 2007 and whether the costs order made against the applicant on 11 September 2007 should be vacated.' 'Whether costs from 31 August 2007 should be apportioned because the applicant failed on discrete and severable issues.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the applicant did not succeed on any pleaded and particularised ground before giving notice on 31 August 2007 of the amended points of claim, supported no order for costs before that date if the costs order against it were vacated, and succeeded only on one aspect of one of three discrete and severable grounds, there should be no order as to costs before 31 August 2007, the 11 September 2007 costs order against the applicant should be vacated, and the respondents should pay 70 percent of the applicant's costs from and including 31 August 2007.

Court Disposition

Costs apportioned; respondents ordered to pay 70 percent of the applicant's costs from and including 31 August 2007, no order as to earlier costs, and the prior costs order against the applicant was vacated.

Orders

  • ['The respondents are to pay 70 percent of the applicants costs of the proceedings from and including 31 August 2007.' 'No order as to costs prior to 31 August 2007.' 'Vacate the order for costs made against the applicant on 11 September 2007.']