Bobolas v Waverley Council (No 2) [2019] NSWLEC 157

Bobolas v Waverley Council (No 2) [2019] NSWLEC 157

The appeal was dismissed as it was filed 68 days after valid service by prepaid post, exceeding the statutory 28-day limit, which cannot be extended. The removal of the second and third applicants was ordered, as only Mary Bobolas was the proper party to the appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Emergency Order (class 1) / Judgment Following Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as statute barred; other applicants removed; costs reserved
Legal Topics
['emergency Orders' 'statutory Appeal Time Limits' 'service of Orders' 'procedural Fairness']
['planning and Environment'] ['emergency Orders' 'statutory Appeal Time Limits' 'service of Orders' 'procedural Fairness']

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

Appeal Against Emergency Order (class 1) / Judgment Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Who is the proper party to the appeal' 'Whether the appeal was filed within statutory time limits' 'Validity of service of the order' 'Lawfulness of orders and evidentiary foundation' 'Certainty of order terms']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed as it was filed 68 days after valid service by prepaid post, exceeding the statutory 28-day limit, which cannot be extended. The removal of the second and third applicants was ordered, as only Mary Bobolas was the proper party to the appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as statute barred; other applicants removed; costs reserved

Orders

  • ['Elena Bobolas and Liana Bobolas removed as applicants to appeal' 'Appeal against emergency Order 5 under EP&A Act dismissed' 'Costs reserved' 'Exhibits returned']