Nanevski Developments Pty Limited v Rockdale City Council [2010] NSWLEC 7

Nanevski Developments Pty Limited v Rockdale City Council [2010] NSWLEC 7

The hearing dates should be vacated because substantive new contentions in the respondent's amended statement of facts and contentions necessitated further expert evidence that could not reasonably be obtained prior to the hearing, and both parties contributed to the need for vacation, so there should be no order as to costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Matter / Notice of Motion to Vacate Hearing Dates
Outcome
hearing dates vacated; no order as to costs
Legal Topics
['vacation of Hearing Dates' 'costs in Class 1 Proceedings']
['practice and Procedure'] ['vacation of Hearing Dates' 'costs in Class 1 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

Class 1 Matter / Notice of Motion to Vacate Hearing Dates

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether hearing dates should be vacated due to need for further expert evidence following amended statement of facts and contentions' 'Whether costs should be ordered as a consequence of the vacation']

Ratio Decidendi

The hearing dates should be vacated because substantive new contentions in the respondent's amended statement of facts and contentions necessitated further expert evidence that could not reasonably be obtained prior to the hearing, and both parties contributed to the need for vacation, so there should be no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

hearing dates vacated; no order as to costs

Orders

  • ['hearing dates of 19 and 20 January 2010 be vacated' 'proceedings be listed for further directions before the Registrar on 19 January 2010']