Regional Express Holdings Limited v Dubbo City Council [2013] NSWLEC 110

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Regional Express Holdings Limited v Dubbo City Council [2013] NSWLEC 110 Hearing dates: 15 July 2013 Decision date: 15 July 2013 Jurisdiction: Class 4 Before: Biscoe J Decision: (1) The hearing of the applicant's notice of motion filed on 21 June 2013 is adjourned to this Friday 19 July 2013. (2) The applicant is to send to Biscoe J's Associate and serve an outline of its submissions by 12 noon on Thursday 18 July 2013. (3) The respondent is to send to Biscoe J's Associate and serve an outline of its submissions by 5 pm Thursday 18 July 2013. (4) Costs of today reserved. Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - application for adjournment of hearing of applicant's notice of motion because applicant had very recently decided to obtain new legal representation. Legislation Cited: Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 rr 59.9, 59.10(2) Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Regional Express Holdings Limited (Applicant) Dubbo City Council (Respondent) Representation: COUNSEL: J Lazarus (Applicant) J M Atkin (Respondent) SOLICITORS: Baker & McKenzie (Applicant) Booth Brown Samuels & Olney (Respondent) File Number(s): 40372/13

EX TEMPORE JUDgment 1This is a notice of motion by the applicant for an order under r 59.10(2) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 extending the time for commencing judicial review proceedings in respect of one of the challenged decisions, an order under r 59.9 for the respondent to provide reasons for the challenged decisions, and an order for leave to amend the summons. 2Upon the motion being called on for hearing this morning (Monday), the applicant sought an adjournment because it has very recently decided to obtain new legal representation - both solicitors and barristers. This was communicated to the respondent's counsel on Friday evening. Counsel appearing for the applicant today is limited by his instructions to seeking an adjournment. 3The respondent does not consent to an adjournment and submits that the notice of motion should be dismissed without prejudice to the applicant filing a new notice of motion seeking the same relief should it wish to do so. I do not see merit in that proposal. Although the situation that has arisen is unfortunate, I am minded to accede to the application for an adjournment, for a relatively short period. The respondent indicates that it will consent to an order for leave to amend the summons in the form annexed to the notice of motion but otherwise will contest to the motion. 4The orders of the Court are as follows: (1)The hearing of the applicant's notice of motion filed on 21 June 2013 is adjourned to this Friday 19 July 2013. (2)The applicant is to send to my Associate and serve an outline of its submissions by 12 noon on Thursday 18 July 2013. (3)The respondent is to send to my Associate and serve an outline of its submissions by 5 pm on Thursday 18 July 2013. (4)The costs of today are reserved. 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. Decision last updated: 18 July 2013