Land and Environment Court of New South Wales CITATION: Rydal Management Pty Ltd v Greater Lithgow City Council; International Study Programs Pty Ltd & Ors v Greater Lithgow City Council & Anor; Rydal & Sodwalls Heritage Association Inc v Greater Lithgow City Council & Anor [1999] NSWLEC 175 Matter 10961 of 1998 APPLICANT Rydal Management Pty Ltd RESPONDENT Greater Lithgow City Council Matter 10465 of 1988 APPLICANT International Study Programs Pty Ltd & Ors FIRST RESPONDENT PARTIES Greater Lithgow City Council SECOND RESPONDENT Rydal Management Pty Ltd Matter 40183 of 1998 APPLICANT Rydal & Sodwalls Heritage Association Incorporated FIRST RESPONDENT Greater Lithgow City Council SECOND RESPONDENT Rydal Management Pty Ltd NUMBER: 10961, 10465 and 40183 of 1998 CORAM: Sheahan J KEY ISSUES: :- Notice of Motion seeking vacation of hearing dates LEGISLATION CITED: DATES OF HEARING: 02/04/1999 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE: 02/04/1999 RYDAL MANAGEMENT PTY LTD Mr W R Davison (Barrister) GREATER LITHGOW CITY COUNCIL LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: Mr D Miller (Barrister) INTERNATIONAL STUDY PROGRAMS PTY LTD & ORS and RYDAL & SODWALLS HERITAGE ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED Mr P Larkin (Barrister) JUDGMENT: IN THE LAND AND Matter No: 10961, 10465 and ENVIRONMENT COURT 40183 of 1998 OF NEW SOUTH WALES Coram: Sheahan J 4 February 1999 Matter 10961 of 1998 RYDAL MANAGEMENT PTY LTD Applicant v GREATER LITHGOW CITY COUNCIL Respondent Matter 10465 of 1998 INTERNATIONAL STUDY PROGRAMS PTY LTD & ORS Applicants v GREATER LITHGOW CITY COUNCIL First Respondent RYDAL MANAGEMENT PTY LIMITED Second Respondent Matter 40183 of 1998 RYDAL & SODWALLS HERITAGE ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED Applicant v GREATER LITHGOW CITY COUNCIL First Respondent RYDAL MANAGEMENT PTY LTD Second Respondent EXTEMPORE JUDGMENT ON NOTICE OF MOTION 1. There are now three matters before the Court in respect of the development application made by Rydal Management Pty Limited. Two of those matters were before the Court on 18 December 1998 and after some debate were adjourned part heard to resume before me on 22 February for a period of four specific days. One of those proceedings was the hearing of a preliminary point of law in class 1 matter 10465/98 and related questions raised in similar terms in the class 4 matter 40183/98. For want of a better term the applicants in those two proceedings are objectors to the application made by Rydal Management Pty Limited to Greater Lithgow City Council and the consent granted by that council to that company. 2. Now before the Court is matter 10961/98 in which Rydal Management appeals against some of the conditions attached by the council to that consent. It would appear from the court papers that that particular class 1 matter is currently listed for a telephone callover on 1 March 1999. 3. Mr Davison SC on behalf of Rydal Management Pty Limited seeks the vacation of the February 22 to 25 hearing dates of the other two proceedings. His motion is supported by counsel for the Lithgow City Council, Mr Miller, and opposed on the basis of utility by Mr Larkin of counsel for the objectors who are the applicants in those two original matters. 4. It is apparent from the argument there would be some utility in some of the issues that we discussed on 18 December 1998 being resolved as soon as convenient to all the parties but, given the information in Mr England's affidavit even though Mr Larkin indicates that the material referred to in that affidavit may prove to be of no relevance to the fundamental issue he raises on behalf of his clients, I for my part can see little point in the hearing proceeding on 22 February until the actual position between the council and Rydal Management Pty Limited clarifies somewhat, as it will in the ordinary course of events in the Court's dealing with matter 10961/98. 5. Accordingly, I grant the motion of the second respondent in matters 10465 and 40183 that the hearing dates be vacated and I adjourn both those matters for callover on 1 March 1999 with matter 10961/98. I grant leave to the parties to approach the registrar to change the arrangements for that callover if it be more effectively done in person. 6. MILLER : I think it needs to be, your Honour. Apparently things were superseded last week and there isn't a telephone callover any more, so the order would need to be for it to go back to the registrar for callover. 7. I will list all three. I therefore call up matter 10961 and list all three for callover before the registrar on 1 March 1999 so that the parties can then give some further consideration in consultation with the Court as to how all three matters should be disposed of. 8. I reserve all questions of cost. DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.