Frketic v Bankstown City Council and Ors [2003] NSWLEC 148

Frketic v Bankstown City Council and Ors [2003] NSWLEC 148

The application was summarily dismissed because it disclosed no reasonable cause of action and failed to identify relevant legal grounds or jurisdiction for the orders sought.

Parties
Applicant: Paul Joseph Frketic; First Respondent: Bankstown City Council; Second Respondent: Sydney Water; Third Respondent: Energy Australia Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Application / Summary Dismissal Application
Outcome
Application summarily dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Dismissal, No Cause of Action
Practice and Procedure Administrative Law Summary Dismissal No Cause of Action

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Joseph Frketic

Applicant

Bankstown City Council

First Respondent

Sydney Water

Second Respondent

Energy Australia Pty Ltd

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Application / Summary Dismissal Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's amended class 1 application discloses a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the Land and Environment Court has jurisdiction to grant the relief sought by the applicant

Ratio Decidendi

The application was summarily dismissed because it disclosed no reasonable cause of action and failed to identify relevant legal grounds or jurisdiction for the orders sought.

Court Disposition

Application summarily dismissed

Orders

  • The amended class 1 application filed on 7 April 2003 is summarily dismissed.
  • The applicant pay the costs of the first and second respondents as agreed or as assessed.