Ivan Jeray v Blue Mountains City Council & Ors Ivan Jeray v Blue Mountains City Council & Ors Ivan Jeray v Blue Mountains City Council

[2013] HCASL 148

IVAN JERAY
v
BLUE MOUNTAINS CITY COUNCIL & ORS

IVAN JERAY
v
BLUE MOUNTAINS CITY COUNCIL & ORS

IVAN JERAY
v
BLUE MOUNTAINS CITY COUNCIL & ORS

[2013] HCASL 148
S74/2013
S75/2013
S76/2013

1. In 2011, the applicant had two proceedings on foot against the respondents in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales.  They were set down to be heard consecutively from 29 November to 16 December 2011.

2. One matter came before Moore AJ on 16 November 2011, but the applicant did not attend, having sent a redacted medical certificate to the Court indicating he would be unfit to prepare and present his case.  Moore AJ ordered that the correspondence be treated as a notice of motion to vacate the hearing dates for both matters, the applicant file affidavits in support, and the motion be heard on 23 November 2011 ("the 16 November order").  On 23 November 2011, the applicant failed to appear and Moore AJ dismissed his motion ("the 23 November order").  On 30 November 2011, Moore AJ dismissed both proceedings for want of prosecution ("the 30 November order").

3. On 11 October 2012, the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales granted the applicant an extension of time to file an application for leave to appeal the 16 November order but dismissed the application with costs.  Applications for extensions of time in which to appeal the 23 and 30 November orders were refused, with costs.  Allsop P, with whom Macfarlan JA agreed, noted a technical error in the form of the 16 November order, but held that no unfairness of any residual kind flowed from this.  There was no other error, injustice or procedural unfairness in the orders made by Moore AJ.

4. The applicant seeks an extension of time in which to file applications for special leave to appeal to this Court.  Those extensions should be refused.  The applications concern matters of practice and procedure, not questions of law, and there is no reason to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision.

5. Pursuant to r 41.10.5, we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing each of the three applications.

S.M. Kiefel
4 September 2013 P.A. Keane