Lend Lease GPT (Rouse Hill) Pty Ltd v Hills Shire Council (No.2) [2011] NSWLEC 26 [2011] NSWLEC 26

Lend Lease GPT (Rouse Hill) Pty Ltd v Hills Shire Council (No.2) [2011] NSWLEC 26 [2011] NSWLEC 26

Because the proceedings involved the determination exclusively of a question of law that disposed of the entire case, and both parties were sophisticated and well-resourced, the presumption against a costs order was displaced. It was fair and reasonable for costs to follow the event, compelling the applicant to pay the respondent’s costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Class 3 Proceedings / Costs Application Following Substantive Judgment
Outcome
Costs ordered against applicant
Legal Topics
['costs in Class 3 Proceedings' 'statutory Exemptions From Land Rates' 'application of Costs Rules']
['local Government Law' 'civil Procedure' 'planning and Environment'] ['costs in Class 3 Proceedings' 'statutory Exemptions From Land Rates' 'application of Costs Rules']

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 3 Proceedings / Costs Application Following Substantive Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the presumptive 'no costs' rule applies to proceedings under s 574 of the Local Government Act 1993" 'Whether costs should follow the event in class 3 proceedings involving a question of law' "Whether the applicant's conduct justifies a costs order"]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the proceedings involved the determination exclusively of a question of law that disposed of the entire case, and both parties were sophisticated and well-resourced, the presumption against a costs order was displaced. It was fair and reasonable for costs to follow the event, compelling the applicant to pay the respondent’s costs.

Court Disposition

Costs ordered against applicant

Orders

  • ["The applicant is ordered to pay the respondent's costs of both the substantive proceedings, and the hearing on the respondent's application for costs."]