Strathfield Municipal Council v. Franklins Limited [1998] NSWLEC 107

Strathfield Municipal Council v. Franklins Limited [1998] NSWLEC 107

Because Sheahan J's decision in the related Class 1 proceedings substituted a different condition for condition 10B, the Class 4 proceedings concerning the original condition had no remaining utility and were dismissed. Both the Council and the Respondent acted reasonably in commencing and defending the proceedings and in the matters leading to them, so applying Lai Qin the appropriate order was no order as to costs, including the costs of the motion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 May 1998
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Proceedings Seeking Declaratory and Injunctive Relief Concerning a Condition of Development Consent, Followed by an Application for Costs / Ex Tempore Judgment on Costs After Related Class 1 Proceedings Displaced the Condition and Rendered the Class 4 Proceedings Futile
Outcome
Application for permanent and interlocutory relief dismissed; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['development Consent Conditions' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'declaratory Relief' 'costs Where Proceedings Become Futile' 'reasonableness of Commencing and Defending Proceedings']
['environmental Planning Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['development Consent Conditions' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'declaratory Relief' 'costs Where Proceedings Become Futile' 'reasonableness of Commencing and Defending Proceedings']

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 4 Proceedings Seeking Declaratory and Injunctive Relief Concerning a Condition of Development Consent, Followed by an Application for Costs / Ex Tempore Judgment on Costs After Related Class 1 Proceedings Displaced the Condition and Rendered the Class 4 Proceedings Futile

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Council should receive its costs of the Class 4 proceedings where the proceedings became of no further utility before adjudication on the merits.' 'Whether the Respondent should receive its costs, including costs of the motion, on the basis that the Council acted unreasonably in bringing the proceedings.' 'Whether the parties acted reasonably in commencing and defending the proceedings and in their conduct leading to the proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because Sheahan J's decision in the related Class 1 proceedings substituted a different condition for condition 10B, the Class 4 proceedings concerning the original condition had no remaining utility and were dismissed. Both the Council and the Respondent acted reasonably in commencing and defending the proceedings and in the matters leading to them, so applying Lai Qin the appropriate order was no order as to costs, including the costs of the motion.

Court Disposition

Application for permanent and interlocutory relief dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for both permanent and interlocutory relief is dismissed.' "There is no order as to costs in the proceedings, including the costs of today's Motion." 'The exhibits may remain with the Court papers.']