Pancho Properties Pty Ltd v Wingecarribee Shire Council [No 2] [1999] NSWLEC 277

Pancho Properties Pty Ltd v Wingecarribee Shire Council [No 2] [1999] NSWLEC 277

The applicant did not establish exceptional circumstances justifying a costs order. The council was justified in raising the issues, including whether the LEP provisions were development standards in light of Dixson v Wingecarribee Shire Council; the council's conduct was not frivolous, vexatious, improper or unreasonable; the complexity and length of the hearing were largely products of the issues and the applicant's actions; and the later LEP amendment and appeal did not create exceptional circumstances. Practice Direction 10 therefore precluded the costs order sought.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 1999
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Planning Appeal Costs Motion / Notices of Motion Seeking Costs Following Judgment Delivered on 29 October 1999
Outcome
Applicant's notices of motion for costs dismissed.
Legal Topics
['class 1 Proceedings' 'exceptional Circumstances for Costs' 'practice Direction 10' 'preliminary Questions of Law' 'development Standards']
['planning and Environment Law' 'costs'] ['class 1 Proceedings' 'exceptional Circumstances for Costs' 'practice Direction 10' 'preliminary Questions of Law' 'development Standards']

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 Planning Appeal Costs Motion / Notices of Motion Seeking Costs Following Judgment Delivered on 29 October 1999

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent should pay the applicant's costs of the respondent's Notices of Motion dated 9 July 1999 and 25 August 1999." 'Whether the preliminary determination of questions of law, complexity of the issues, length of the hearing, council conduct, amendment of the LEP, or an appeal against the determination constituted exceptional circumstances justifying a costs order in planning appeals.' 'Whether the council acted frivolously, vexatiously, oppressively, unreasonably, improperly or from an improper motive in raising the issues.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not establish exceptional circumstances justifying a costs order. The council was justified in raising the issues, including whether the LEP provisions were development standards in light of Dixson v Wingecarribee Shire Council; the council's conduct was not frivolous, vexatious, improper or unreasonable; the complexity and length of the hearing were largely products of the issues and the applicant's actions; and the later LEP amendment and appeal did not create exceptional circumstances. Practice Direction 10 therefore precluded the costs order sought.

Court Disposition

Applicant's notices of motion for costs dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The Court formally answered the preliminary questions of law set out in the judgment.' 'The notices of motion seeking an order for costs against the council are dismissed.']