Hurstville City Council v Jacobs

[2015] NSWLEC 127

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Hurstville City Council v Jacobs and Anor [2015] NSWLEC 127
Hearing dates:	17 July 2015
Date of orders:	17 July 2015
Decision date:	17 July 2015
Jurisdiction:	Class 4
Before:	Moore AJ
Decision:	See [4]
Catchwords:	COSTS – substantive orders by consent – costs reserved – costs orders made
Category:	Costs
Parties:	Hurstville City Council (Applicant) Kevin Roy Jacobs (First Respondent) Estate of Ronald John Jacobs (Second Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: M Cottom, Solicitor (Applicant) No appearance (First Respondent) Submitting Appearance (Second Respondent)   Solicitors: HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (Applicant)
File Number(s):	40060 of 2015
Publication restriction:	No

EXTEMPORE Judgment

1. HIS HONOUR: I am satisfied that Mr Jacobs was on notice of the costs hearing today by virtue of his appearance before the Registrar on 6 June when this matter was set down for hearing today. I have read the outline of submissions by Mr Cottom as to why costs in the proceedings should be ordered against Mr Kevin Roy Jacobs as the First Respondent.

2. As Mr Jacobs had not been in Court at the commencement of the proceedings today, I arranged for him to be called three times outside the courtroom and, there being no response to that call, I have proceeded to deal with the matters in his absence.

3. I am satisfied that, as a consequence of Mr Jacobs being a self-represented litigant, that it would be appropriate to do two things:

1. First, to make the Order for Costs that is sought by the Council but to do so in a form that will require service of a copy of the order on Mr Jacobs both by e-mail at the e-mail address that he has notified in his original Notice of Appearance filed on 20 April 2015; and

2. Second, require the applicant Council to place a copy of the orders that will be made as a consequence of this morning’s hearing into Mr Jacobs’ letterbox at 58 Johnstone Street, Peakhurst.

4. I propose to make the Order for Costs in terms that, if Mr Jacobs wishes to be heard further to dispute the Order for Costs, he is to notify my Associate of his desire to do so and he is to be required to do that by close of business on Friday 31 July 2015 and, if that occurs, there will be a supplementary opportunity provided to enable Mr Jacobs to explain why he considers the orders should not be made. The orders, therefore, are:

1. The First Respondent is to pay the Applicant’s costs of the proceedings, including of this costs hearing, as agreed or assessed unless the First Respondent advises my Associate by 4.30 pm on Friday 31 July 2015 that he wishes to be heard further to dispute the application; and

2. The Applicant is to serve a copy of these orders on Mr Jacobs by e-mail to the e-mail address that he has provided in his Notice of Appearance, a copy of which notice I have provided to the Applicant’s legal representative this morning and also by causing a copy of the orders to be placed in the letterbox of Mr Jacobs’ residential address as recorded on that Notice of Appearance.

**********

Decision last updated: 13 August 2015