Michael Ryan v Northern Regional Planning Panel (No 2)

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Michael Ryan v Northern Regional Planning Panel (No 2) [2019] NSWLEC 167
Hearing dates:	01 November 2019
Date of orders:	01 November 2019
Decision date:	01 November 2019
Jurisdiction:	Class 4
Before:	Robson J
Decision:	See orders at [16]
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – notice of motion filed by the applicant seeking leave to re-open case after receiving evidence and hearing argument in relation to an earlier notice of motion filed by the applicant seeking urgent interlocutory relief – motion dismissed
Category:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	Michael Ryan (Applicant) Northern Regional Planning Panel (First Respondent) Lismore City Council (Second Respondent) Winten (No 12) Pty Ltd (Third Respondent) W A Sexton (Fourth Respondent) Glorbill Pty Ltd (Fifth Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: L M Saw (Applicant) V Walsh, solicitor (Third Respondent)   Solicitors: A Oshlack, agent (Applicant) Dentons (Third Respondent)
File Number(s):	2019/00006908
Publication restriction:	Nil

EX TEMPORE Judgment

1. Subsequent to a hearing on 31 October 2019 in relation to a notice of motion filed on 30 October 2019 by Michael Ryan (‘applicant’) seeking urgent interlocutory relief (‘October Motion’), and shortly before judgment on the October Motion is due to be delivered at 2pm today, the applicant seeks to re-open his case and files in Court (with leave) a notice of motion dated 1 November 2019 (‘November Motion’).

2. In the November Motion, the applicant seeks:

1   An order that this motion be listed on an urgent basis.

2   An order that leave be granted for the Applicant to re-open his case.

3   An order that David Milledge be permitted to attend the development site for the purposes of preparing a report on the impact on threatened species and threatened species habitats of the works undertaken on the site.

4   An order that Applicant’s motion for an interlocutory injunction be adjourned.

5   Any other order the Court considers appropriate.

3. The applicant is represented by Ms L M Saw of counsel and the third respondent, Winten (No 12) Pty Ltd (‘Winten’), is represented by Ms V Walsh, solicitor.

4. In support of the November Motion, the applicant reads, over the objection of Ms Walsh, the affidavit of Alan Oshlack, agent for the applicant, affirmed 1 November 2019.

5. For concision, I do not summarise the background of the matter and I refer to the facts to be set out in my judgment in relation to the October Motion which I will deliver after these reasons are given.

6. In summary, the affidavit of Mr Oshlack provides that:

1. this morning (1 November 2019), the applicant informed Mr Oshlack that he had taken further photographs of the site which Mr Oshlack thereafter forwarded to Ms Saw of counsel, and David Milledge, an ecologist retained by the applicant;

2. today, Mr Oshlack had a conversation with Robert Corowa, an Indigenous Elder, who accompanied the applicant at the site this morning; and

3. Mr Oshlack then spoke to Mr Milledge who indicated that he would “only need half a day if the Court allows…