Pan Pacific Property Group Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2010] NSWLEC 1001

Pan Pacific Property Group Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2010] NSWLEC 1001

The respondent failed to take proper steps to comply with Court directions or address issues with the applicant in a timely manner; the applicant’s conduct was not unreasonable; thus, it would not be fair and reasonable to make a costs order in favour of the respondent.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Costs Application Within Interlocutory Proceedings (class 1) / Post Interlocutory Motion Decision
Outcome
Costs order refused in favour of respondent; respondent to pay applicant's costs of the costs application.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'land and Environment Court Procedures' 'vacating Hearing Dates']
['civil Procedure' 'environmental Planning Law'] ['costs' 'land and Environment Court Procedures' 'vacating Hearing Dates']

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 Within Interlocutory Proceedings (class 1) / Post Interlocutory Motion Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant acted unreasonably in failing to provide plans in accordance with the respondent's requests" "Whether it is fair and reasonable to order the applicant to pay the respondent's costs" 'Whether the respondent’s conduct was unreasonable in delaying notification and seeking costs']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent failed to take proper steps to comply with Court directions or address issues with the applicant in a timely manner; the applicant’s conduct was not unreasonable; thus, it would not be fair and reasonable to make a costs order in favour of the respondent.

Court Disposition

Costs order refused in favour of respondent; respondent to pay applicant's costs of the costs application.

Orders

  • ['Prayer 6 of the notice of motion filed 4 December 2009 dismissed.' "The respondent pay the applicant's costs of the costs application made by the respondent pursuant to prayer 6 and heard on 9 December 2009."]