Seek Justice Pty Ltd v Minister for Lands and Water [2024] NSWLEC 96
Leave was refused for most new or evaluative amendments and the proposed transfer to the Supreme Court, due to unjustified delay, potential prejudice, lack of proper case management reasons, and because the main proceedings remain within the Court's jurisdiction. Only certain uncontroversial and particularised amendments were permitted, and production of legible copies of specific documents was ordered by consent.
- Parties
- Applicant: Seek Justice Pty Ltd; First Respondent: Minister for Lands and Water; Second Respondent: Blue Mountains City Council; Third Respondent: Church Missionary Society NSW & ACT Ltd; Fourth Respondent: Minister for Local Government
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 25 September 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Class 4 Proceeding (land and Environment Court) / Notice of Motion—application for Production of Documents, Application for Leave to Amend Summons, and Transfer of Proceedings Prior to Substantive Hearing
- Outcome
- Applicant partly successful on minor unopposed amendments and document production; otherwise applicant's amended Notice of Motion dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Notice of Motion, Amendment of Pleadings, Discovery/production of Documents, Jurisdiction, Transfer of Proceedings, Civil Procedure Act 2005 (nsw), Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (nsw)
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Seek Justice Pty Ltd
Applicant
Minister for Lands and Water
First Respondent
Blue Mountains City Council
Second Respondent
Church Missionary Society NSW & ACT Ltd
Third Respondent
Minister for Local Government
Fourth Respondent
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Proceeding (land and Environment Court) / Notice of Motion—application for Production of Documents, Application for Leave to Amend Summons, and Transfer of Proceedings Prior to Substantive Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave should be granted for production of documents and to amend the further amended summons
- 2 Whether proceedings should be transferred to the Supreme Court under s 149B(1) Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)
- 3 Whether there was undue delay in making certain applications
Ratio Decidendi
Leave was refused for most new or evaluative amendments and the proposed transfer to the Supreme Court, due to unjustified delay, potential prejudice, lack of proper case management reasons, and because the main proceedings remain within the Court's jurisdiction. Only certain uncontroversial and particularised amendments were permitted, and production of legible copies of specific documents was ordered by consent.
Court Disposition
Applicant partly successful on minor unopposed amendments and document production; otherwise applicant's amended Notice of Motion dismissed.
Orders
- Second Respondent to provide legible printed copies by post of specified documents previously produced in unreadable PDF format.
- Applicant granted leave to file further amended summons only to the extent of the uncontested amendments and certain minor particularisation/amendments specified in the orders.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment