NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Hibiscus Court Pty Ltd V Pittwater Council [2000] NSWLEC 58 APPLICANT: Hibiscus Court Pty Ltd PARTIES : RESPONDENT: Pittwater Council FILE NUMBER(S) : 10745 of 1999 CORAM: Bignold J Practice & Procedure :- Motion to extend time to appeal under s 56A. Relevant principles - delay KEY ISSUES: explanation for delay prejudice merits of the appeal. LEGISLATION CITED: Land and Environment Court Rules, pt 13 r 35 Australand Holdings Pty Ltd v Hornsby Council (Unreported 17 June 1998) Lloyd J; CASES CITED: Palata Investments Ltd v Burt and Sinfield Ltd (1985) 2 AllER 517; Jackamarra v Krakouer (1998) 195 CLR 516; Danny Kidron and Andrew Spaile Architects Pty Ltd v Garrett (1994) 35 NSWLR 512 DATES OF HEARING: 21/03/00 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/22/2000
APPLICANT: Ms S Duggan, Barrister SOLICITORS Pike Pike and Fenwick LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT: Mr A Galasso, Barrister SOLICITORS Mallesons Stequen Jaques
JUDGMENT: IN THE LAND AND Matter No . 10745 of 1999 ENVIRONMENT COURT OF Coram : Bignold J. NEW SOUTH WALES 22 March 2000
HIBISCUS COURT PTY LTD
Applicant
v
PITTWATER COUNCIL
Respondent
JUDGMENT ON APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR APPEAL
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