Knox v. Wingecarribee Council [1998] NSWLEC 91

Knox v. Wingecarribee Council [1998] NSWLEC 91

Costs were ordered because the evidence and planning considerations were equally relevant to both the Class One and Class Four proceedings, so the successful party costs principle applied, and because the development had already been carried out and completed before the development application was lodged, which was an exceptional circumstance justifying a costs order notwithstanding the usual practice in Class One planning appeals.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 May 1998
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs in Proceedings in Class One and Class Four of the Court's Jurisdiction Heard Together / Post Judgment Costs Application
Outcome
Costs ordered in favour of Wingecarribee Council, subject to earlier costs orders made on 24 August 1997 and 10 September 1997.
Legal Topics
['costs Discretion' 'development Without Consent' 'planning Appeal' 'class One Proceedings' 'class Four Proceedings']
['planning and Environment Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['costs Discretion' 'development Without Consent' 'planning Appeal' 'class One Proceedings' 'class Four Proceedings']

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

Application for Costs in Proceedings in Class One and Class Four of the Court's Jurisdiction Heard Together / Post Judgment Costs Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Wingecarribee Council, as the successful party in the Class One and Class Four proceedings heard together, should have its costs.' "Whether the Court's practice of making no order for costs in planning and building appeals unless circumstances are exceptional should preclude a costs order." 'Whether the evidence and issues could be attributed solely to the Class One proceeding rather than the Class Four proceeding.' 'Whether the carrying out and completion of the development before the development application was lodged constituted an exceptional circumstance justifying a costs order.']

Ratio Decidendi

Costs were ordered because the evidence and planning considerations were equally relevant to both the Class One and Class Four proceedings, so the successful party costs principle applied, and because the development had already been carried out and completed before the development application was lodged, which was an exceptional circumstance justifying a costs order notwithstanding the usual practice in Class One planning appeals.

Court Disposition

Costs ordered in favour of Wingecarribee Council, subject to earlier costs orders made on 24 August 1997 and 10 September 1997.

Orders

  • ["Subject to the orders for costs made on 24 August 1997 and on 10 September 1997, the respondent, Jacqueline Patricia Knox, pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to matter No 40128/97." "Subject to the orders for costs made on 24 August 1997 and on 10 September 1997, the applicant, Jacqueline Patricia Knox,...