Owners of Strata Plan 37762 v Pham and Ors [2005] NSWLEC 663

Owners of Strata Plan 37762 v Pham and Ors [2005] NSWLEC 663

The Court found it appropriate to extend the time for compliance with its previous orders due to the pending Supreme Court appeal and the possible granting of new development consent. The power to extend flows from Pt 1 r 8 of the Court Rules, and the potential for a lawful outcome rendered immediate compliance undesirable. In relation to costs, a deduction was made for duplicative evidence, but general costs followed the event.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 December 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay/variation of Orders / Post Judgment; Application for Extension of Time/compliance With Prior Orders
Outcome
Orders for reinstatement and cessation of use extended; partial costs deduction for duplication; first and second respondents to pay applicant’s costs less specified amount; proceedings relisted for mention.
Legal Topics
['stay of Orders' 'extension of Time' 'development Consent' 'demolition Orders' 'costs']
['practice and Procedure' 'planning and Environment Law'] ['stay of Orders' 'extension of Time' 'development Consent' 'demolition Orders' 'costs']

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 Stay/variation of Orders / Post Judgment; Application for Extension of Time/compliance With Prior Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the time for compliance with orders for reinstatement and cessation of use should be further extended' 'Whether the court has power to vary its previous orders after judgment (functus officio)' 'Appropriate costs orders in relation to duplication of evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found it appropriate to extend the time for compliance with its previous orders due to the pending Supreme Court appeal and the possible granting of new development consent. The power to extend flows from Pt 1 r 8 of the Court Rules, and the potential for a lawful outcome rendered immediate compliance undesirable. In relation to costs, a deduction was made for duplicative evidence, but general costs followed the event.

Court Disposition

Orders for reinstatement and cessation of use extended; partial costs deduction for duplication; first and second respondents to pay applicant’s costs less specified amount; proceedings relisted for mention.

Orders

  • ['Order 4 of 13 September 2005 varied: new compliance dates are 6 March 2006 (for restraint of use) and 3 April 2006 (for reinstatement) instead of 9 December 2005 and 9 January 2006 respectively.' "First and second respondents to pay the applicant's costs of the proceedings, less $1,000." 'Proceedings listed for...