NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Mansfield v Wyong Shire Council [2000] NSWLEC 260 APPLICANT: James Mansfield PARTIES : RESPONDENT: Wyong Shire Council FILE NUMBER(S) : 10441 of 1999 CORAM: Talbot J KEY ISSUES: Costs :- exceptional circumstances where formal proof of disputed jurisdictional fact is required LEGISLATION CITED: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 CASES CITED: Outdoor Australia Pty Ltd v Auburn Council (1996) 89 LGERA 365 DATES OF HEARING: 7/12/2000 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12/12/2000
APPLICANT: Mr W R Davison SC
SOLICITORS: Pike Pike & Fenwick LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT: Mr W P O'Rourke (Solicitor)
SOLICITORS: Deacons Graham & James
JUDGMENT: IN THE LAND AND Matter No. 10441 of 1999 ENVIRONMENT COURT Coram: Talbot J OF NEW SOUTH WALES Decision Date: 12 December, 2000
James Mansfield Applicant v Wyong Shire Council Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1. On 23 June 2000 I delivered judgment whereby there was a finding on a preliminary issue that use of part of the applicant's land for the purpose of steel fabrication is an existing use within the meaning of the definition contained in s 106(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
2. These are class 1 proceedings which are the subject of cl 10 of the Land and Environment Court Practice Direction 1993 ("the Practice Direction"). Clause 10 reiterates the practice of the Court that no order for costs is made in planning and building appeals unless the circumstances are exceptional.
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