Reysson Pty Ltd v Roads and Maritime Services (No 4) [2016] NSWLEC 159

Reysson Pty Ltd v Roads and Maritime Services (No 4) [2016] NSWLEC 159

Correction of factual errors alleged by Reysson was not warranted under slip rule as the findings involved evaluative and discretionary judgments; delivery of judgment by telephone to solicitors on a Sunday was authorised by statutes and court rules, and not irregular; any procedural irregularity was waived by the applicant; no error established in assessment of compensation; motion to set aside or vary judgment and orders was rejected.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Compensation for Compulsory Acquisition (class 3) / Post Judgment Motion to Set Aside/vary Judgment and Orders
Outcome
Applicant's motion dismissed; costs ordered as described.
Legal Topics
['slip Rule' 'judgment Delivery' 'open Justice Principle' 'compulsory Land Acquisition' 'market Value Assessment' 'costs Orders']
['civil Procedure' 'compensation Law' 'administrative Law'] ['slip Rule' 'judgment Delivery' 'open Justice Principle' 'compulsory Land Acquisition' 'market Value Assessment' 'costs Orders']

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

Compensation for Compulsory Acquisition (class 3) / Post Judgment Motion to Set Aside/vary Judgment and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether alleged factual errors in determination of compensation can be corrected under slip rule' 'Whether judgment was given irregularly and should be set aside' 'Whether entry of judgment should be set aside for irregularity' 'Whether judgment was given in absence of parties and should be set aside under UCPR' 'Appropriate orders as to costs']

Ratio Decidendi

Correction of factual errors alleged by Reysson was not warranted under slip rule as the findings involved evaluative and discretionary judgments; delivery of judgment by telephone to solicitors on a Sunday was authorised by statutes and court rules, and not irregular; any procedural irregularity was waived by the applicant; no error established in assessment of compensation; motion to set aside or vary judgment and orders was rejected.

Court Disposition

Applicant's motion dismissed; costs ordered as described.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's further amended notice of motion filed on 29 November 2016 is dismissed." "The respondent is to pay the applicant's costs of the proceedings, other than the costs of the applicant's motion."]