NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision : 114 LGERA 106
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Multistar Pty Ltd v The Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning & Anor [No. 3] [2001] NSWLEC 101 APPLICANT: Multistar Pty Ltd ACN 072 013 275
PARTIES : FIRST RESPONDENT: The Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning
SECOND RESPONDENT: Sydney City Council FILE NUMBER(S) : 40184 of 1999 CORAM: Lloyd J KEY ISSUES: Costs :- apportionment of costs - whether discrete question could have been determined separately - applicant unsuccessful on all issues Practice & Procedure : - amendment of published reasons LEGISLATION CITED: Land and Environment Court Rules 1996 Pt 15 r 9 Bailey v Marinoff (1971) 125 CLR 529; Bromley v Bromley [1965] P 111; DJL v Central Authority (2000) 74 ALJR 706; James v Thomas H Kent & Co Ltd [1950] 2 All ER 1099; [1957] 1 KB 557; CASES CITED: Milne v Attorney-General (Tas) (1956) 95 CLR 460; Multistar Pty Ltd v The Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning [No. 2] (2000) 111 LGERA 319; Pavey & Matthews Pty Ltd v Paul (1987) 162 CLR 221; Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72; Schwarstein v Watson (1985) 3 NSWLR 134 DATES OF HEARING: 16/03/2001 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/28/2001
APPLICANT: Mr N A Hemmings QC (Solicitor) SOLICITORS: Allen Allen & Hemsley
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate