Razorback Environment Protection Society Inc - V - Wollondilly Council & Anor [1999] NSWLEC 8

Razorback Environment Protection Society Inc - V - Wollondilly Council & Anor [1999] NSWLEC 8

Security for costs was ordered because there was reason to believe the applicant body corporate could not pay the respondents' costs if ordered to do so, its case had no better than a moderate chance of success, no personal undertakings for costs were offered, the motions were brought relatively early, and although the proceeding had a public interest aspect, that factor was not determinative and did not outweigh the considerations favouring security.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 February 1999
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs in Proceedings Under S 123 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 / Notices of Motion Before Final Hearing
Outcome
Security for costs ordered in favour of both respondents; proceeding stayed until security is given; costs of the Notices of Motion reserved.
Legal Topics
['security for Costs' 'public Interest Litigation' 'open Standing' 'judicial Review of Development Consents' 'deferred Commencement Consent']
['environmental Planning Law' 'civil Procedure' 'administrative Law'] ['security for Costs' 'public Interest Litigation' 'open Standing' 'judicial Review of Development Consents' 'deferred Commencement Consent']

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 Security for Costs in Proceedings Under S 123 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 / Notices of Motion Before Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant should be ordered to provide security for the respondents' costs." "Whether the applicant, being a body corporate, was likely to be unable to pay the respondents' costs if ordered to do so." 'Whether the public interest nature of the proceedings should weigh against an order for security for costs.' "Whether the applicant's case was sufficiently strong to resist security for costs."]

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs was ordered because there was reason to believe the applicant body corporate could not pay the respondents' costs if ordered to do so, its case had no better than a moderate chance of success, no personal undertakings for costs were offered, the motions were brought relatively early, and although the proceeding had a public interest aspect, that factor was not determinative and did not outweigh the considerations favouring security.

Court Disposition

Security for costs ordered in favour of both respondents; proceeding stayed until security is given; costs of the Notices of Motion reserved.

Orders

  • ['The applicant give security for the costs of the first respondent of and incidental to the proceeding in the amount of $25,000, in a form satisfactory to the Registrar.' 'The applicant give security for the costs of the second respondent of and incidental to the proceeding in the amount of $25,000, in a form...