Zheng, Xiao Ping v Hurstville City Council [2013] NSWLEC 1183

Zheng, Xiao Ping v Hurstville City Council [2013] NSWLEC 1183

Given the applicant's assurance that the flood study is now completed, willingness to pay wasted costs, and the absence of irreparable prejudice to the respondent, it is in the public interest and the interests of justice to refuse dismissal, permit adjournment, and allow amendment for further determination of the DA appeal.

Parties
Applicant: Zheng, Xiao Ping; Respondent: Hurstville City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 September 2013
Procedural Posture
S 97 DA Appeal / Notice of Motion for Dismissal, Application to Vacate and Amend Development Application
Outcome
Applicant's motion to vacate hearing date allowed; respondent's motion to dismiss dismissed; balance of applicant's motions adjourned.
Legal Topics
Development Applications, Flood Modelling, Case Management, Adjournment, Practice and Procedure
Planning and Environment Law Civil Procedure Development Applications Flood Modelling Case Management Adjournment Practice and Procedure

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zheng, Xiao Ping

Applicant

Hurstville City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

S 97 DA Appeal / Notice of Motion for Dismissal, Application to Vacate and Amend Development Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings should be dismissed for want of due despatch
  2. 2 Whether adjournment should be permitted to allow amendment to the development application in light of new flood study

Ratio Decidendi

Given the applicant's assurance that the flood study is now completed, willingness to pay wasted costs, and the absence of irreparable prejudice to the respondent, it is in the public interest and the interests of justice to refuse dismissal, permit adjournment, and allow amendment for further determination of the DA appeal.

Court Disposition

Applicant's motion to vacate hearing date allowed; respondent's motion to dismiss dismissed; balance of applicant's motions adjourned.

Orders

  • The applicant's order to vacate the hearing date of 27/9/2013 is allowed.
  • The balance of the applicant's motions (27/9/2013) adjourned until 22/10/2013.