Jarvis v Queanbeyan City Council

NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

CITATION:      Susan Denise Jarvis v Queanbeyan City Council [2002]  NSWCA 20

FILE NUMBER(S):
40399/01

HEARING DATE(S):               8 February 2002

JUDGMENT DATE: 08/02/2002

PARTIES:
Susan Denise Jarvis (Appellant)
Queanbeyan City Council (Respondent)

JUDGMENT OF:       Stein JA Heydon JA Mathews AJA   

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Land & Environment Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S):          LEC 40030/01

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER:     Sheahan J

COUNSEL:
M G Craig QC/I J Hemmings (Appellant)
P Menzies QC/J E Robson (Respondent)

SOLICITORS:
Johnson & Sendal (Appellant)
Baker Deane & Nutt (Respondent)

CATCHWORDS:
LOCAL GOVERNMENT - powers, functions and duties of councils - Council Resolutions - Code of Conduct - expulsion of Councillor from meetings - utility of appeal - costs - ND

LEGISLATION CITED:
N/A

DECISION:
1) Appeal dismissed  2) Each party pay and bear its and her own costs

JUDGMENT:

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL

CA         40399/01

STEIN JA
HEYDON JA
MATHEWS AJA

Friday, 8 February 2002

Susan Denise JARVIS v QUEANBEYAN CITY COUNCIL

Judgment

1. STEIN JA:            Before the court is an appeal from a decision given by Sheahan J in the Land and Environment Court on 31 May 2001.  His Honour was hearing an application for declaratory relief by the appellant, Susan Denise Jarvis, against the respondent, Queanbeyan City Council. 

1. The declarations which were sought before his Honour related to certain resolutions of the respondent Council concerning the appellant who is a Councillor of the respondent.  Essentially there were two sets of resolutions involving the appellant. The first was whether or not she had breached certain clauses of the Council’s Code of Conduct. The second concerned the Council’s resolution to reprimand Councillor Jarvis in respect of her conduct and required from her a formal written apology in lieu of which she would be dealt with for a breach of the Council’s Code of Conduct.

2. The written apology was not forthcoming from Councillor Jarvis and in response a subsequent Council meeting resolved to expel her from the meeting. There were subsequent similar resolutions passed at further Council meetings. 

1. The appellant failed before the Land and Environment Court to obtain any of the declaratory relief for which she sought. The result of those proceedings was that her application was dismissed and an order for costs of the trial was made against her. 

1. The appellant promptly appealed to this Court setting forth lengthy grounds of appeal.  Thereafter, there apparently occurred exchanges of correspondence between the respective legal representatives of the parties and between the Mayor and the appellant.  Some of these have been tendered to the court.

1. At various points of time it seems that the respondent wished to maintain its position in relation to the appellant’s expulsion from Council meetings, unless the apology was forthcoming. At other points of time, the correspondence indicates a softened position by the Council and a willingness to sit down and see whether the parties could meet and come to a reasonable resolution of this sad and sorry saga. 

1. However, no resolution…