Sammut Developments Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2006] NSWLEC 117

Sammut Developments Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2006] NSWLEC 117

It is fair and reasonable in the circumstances for the applicant to pay the respondent's costs thrown away and the costs of the motion, as the extent and consequences of amended plans required additional work, renotification, and the vacation of hearing dates.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Class One Appeal / Post Judgment Costs Application
Outcome
Notice of motion for costs upheld. Costs ordered against applicant.
Legal Topics
['amended Plans' 'costs Thrown Away' 'vacation of Hearing Dates']
['planning and Environment Law' 'costs'] ['amended Plans' 'costs Thrown Away' 'vacation of 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

Class One Appeal / Post Judgment Costs Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether it is fair and reasonable to order the applicant to pay the respondent’s costs thrown away due to amended plans and vacation of hearing dates' 'Appropriate quantification of costs']

Ratio Decidendi

It is fair and reasonable in the circumstances for the applicant to pay the respondent's costs thrown away and the costs of the motion, as the extent and consequences of amended plans required additional work, renotification, and the vacation of hearing dates.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion for costs upheld. Costs ordered against applicant.

Orders

  • ["The applicant is to pay the respondent's costs thrown away as a consequence of the amendments to the development application in the sum agreed, or failing agreement as assessed." 'The applicant is to pay the costs of the motion in the sum of $1,058.']