NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Statewide Planning Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council (No 3) [2018] NSWLEC 109 Hearing dates: 26 February 2018 Date of orders: 27 July 2018 Decision date: 27 July 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Sheahan J Decision: The Council's Notice of Motion is upheld. See paragraph [169] Catchwords: COSTS: Whether fair and reasonable to depart from the usual order in Class 1 proceedings that each party pay its own costs – application for costs made more than 28 days after final orders in the appeal – principles to apply – costs of motion. Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Rules 2007 Cases Cited: Aldi Foods Pty Ltd v Holroyd City Council (2005) 142 LGERA 141 Arden Anglican School v Hornsby Shire Council (2008) 158 LGERA 224; [2008] NSWLEC 103 Community Association DP270253 v Woollahra Municipal Council (2015) 207 LGERA 268; [2015] NSWCA 80 Dunford v Gosford City Council (No 3) [2015] NSWLEC 96 Futurespace Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council (2009) 169 LGERA 45; [2009] NSWLEC 153 Grant v Kiama Municipal Council [2006] NSWLEC 70 Hunter v Central Coast Council [2017] NSWLEC 154 Ku-ring-gai Council v Bunnings Properties Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] NSWLEC 19 Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534; [1990] HCA 59 Luxe Manly Pty Limited v Northern Beaches Council [2016] NSWLEC 156 Marinkovic v Rockdale City Council (2007) 151 LGERA 385; [2007] NSWLEC 71 McDonald's Australia Limited v Ashfield Council (No 2) [2012] NSWLEC 268 Port Stephens Council v Sansom (2007) 156 LGERA 125; [2007] NSWCA 299 Statewide Planning Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1133 Statewide Planning Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council (No 2) [2017] NSWLEC 1440 Tomko v Palasty (No. 2) (2007) 71 NSWLR 61; [2007] NSWCA 369 Universal Childcare Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2008] NSWLEC 277 Valoth v Parramatta City Council (No 2) [2012] NSWLEC 161 Category: Costs Parties: Statewide Planning Pty Ltd (Applicant) Penrith City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr J Doyle, barrister (Applicant) Mr N Eastman, barrister (Respondent)
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