Brett Hodgson v The Hills Shire Council (No 2) [2021] NSWLEC 133

Brett Hodgson v The Hills Shire Council (No 2) [2021] NSWLEC 133

It was not fair and reasonable to depart from the usual rule on costs in class 1 proceedings as the applicants' conduct with respect to the bushfire assessment was within the ordinary course of a merit review and there was no failure to comply with directions or provide information unreasonably; the absence of an application to review a prior costs decision precluded exercising any discretion under s 8.15(3).

Parties
First Applicant: Brett Hodgson; Second Applicant: Yvonne Hodgson; Respondent: The Hills Shire Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Costs Determination After Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome
Notice of Motion for costs dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs, Development Applications, Merit Review, Amendment of Pleadings
Environmental Law Planning Law Civil Procedure Costs Development Applications Merit Review Amendment of Pleadings

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brett Hodgson

First Applicant

Yvonne Hodgson

Second Applicant

The Hills Shire Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Costs Determination After Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is fair and reasonable to order the applicants to pay the respondent's costs under Land and Environment Court Rules 2007 (NSW) r 3.7(3)(b) or (f)
  2. 2 Whether s 8.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) enables a costs order for an amendment application where no formal review of registrar's decision has been sought

Ratio Decidendi

It was not fair and reasonable to depart from the usual rule on costs in class 1 proceedings as the applicants' conduct with respect to the bushfire assessment was within the ordinary course of a merit review and there was no failure to comply with directions or provide information unreasonably; the absence of an application to review a prior costs decision precluded exercising any discretion under s 8.15(3).

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion for costs dismissed

Orders

  • Notice of Motion dismissed
  • Exhibits on the Notice of Motion to be retained as the exhibits in the class 1 proceedings