Land and Environment Court of New South Wales CITATION : Kennedy & Anor v Woollahra Municipal Council [2005] NSWLEC 226 Tom Kennedy (Appl) PARTIES : Ben Raymond (Appl) Woollahra Municipal Council (Resp) FILE NUMBER(S) : 10824 of 2002 CORAM: McClellan CJ Costs :- fair and reasonable costs KEY ISSUES: Work done by court appointed expert beyond the assessment of the plans Concur with the Commissioner in the making of the order for costs DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07/22/2005 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 03/04/2005 LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: JUDGMENT: THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES McCLELLAN J FRIDAY, 22 JULY 2005 10824/02 KENNEDY & ORS v WOOLLAHRA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL JUDGMENT: Reasons for judgment on concurrence 1 HIS HONOUR: In this matter I have considered the reasons why Commissioner Tuor is of the opinion that an order for costs should be made. 2 Essential to the Commissioner's reasons is the fact that the applicant, by being granted leave to rely upon amended plans, is the beneficiary of work done by the court appointed expert beyond the assessment of the plans, the subject of the original application. 3 The Court has recently changed its general approach to amended plans and will, provided the interests of the council and any objectors are adequately protected, generally allow a party to bring forward amended plans for consideration in the appeal. 4 However, apart from ensuring that the hearing is fair it is also necessary to recognise that particularly, when a court expert is appointed the council may incur costs beyond those which it should reasonably be expected to bear in consideration of the appeal. 5 The Court will be concerned in every case to ensure that where a council could be disadvantaged in this way by an acceptance of amended plans an appropriate order for costs is made. 6 I am satisfied, for the reasons expressed by Commissioner Tuor, that the order she proposes is appropriate in this case and accordingly I concur in the making of that order. ********** 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.