Namul Pty Limited v The Hills Shire Council

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Namul Pty Limited v The Hills Shire Council [2016] NSWLEC 152
Hearing dates: 17 November 2016
Date of orders: 17 November 2016
Decision date: 17 November 2016
Jurisdiction: Class 1
Before: Moore J
Decision:
Application for joinder dismissed

Catchwords: JOINDER – claim of legal interest in land – claim said to found basis for joinder – claim rejected by Supreme Court – appeal against determination dismissed by Courtof Appeal – no other basis asserted to support joinder application – joinder refused
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 39A
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Cases Cited: Namul Pty Ltd v Milovan Stankovic [2013] NSWSC 115
Stankovic v Namul Pty Ltd [2013] NSWCA 276
Category: Procedural and other rulings
Parties: Namul Pty Limited (Applicant)
The Hills Shire Council (Respondent)
Milovan Stankovic (Applicant for Joinder)
Representation:
Counsel:
Ms N Rodwell (Applicant)
Mr A Hudson (Respondent)
Mr M Stankovic (In person)
Solicitors:
Addisons (Applicant)
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)

File Number(s): 197481 of 2016
Publication restriction: No

EX TEMPORE Judgment

HIS HONOUR: On 14 February 2013, in Namul Pty Ltd v Milovan Stankovic [2013] NSWSC 115, Rein J held, and made declarations to that effect, that Mr Stankovic had no right title or interest in the property that is the subject of this development application.
On 27 August 2013 in Stankovic v Namul Pty Ltd [2013] NSWCA 276, Meagher and Barrett JJA and Tobias AJA dismissed Mr Stankovic’s appeal against the decision of Rein J and held that he had, by confirming that decision, no interest in the property.
The provisions of s 39A of the Land and Environment Court Act1979 require that there be one of three tests satisfied before a person can be joined as a party to an appeal. Those tests are:

First, that the person is able to raise an issue that should be considered in relation to the appeal but would not be likely to be sufficiently addressed if the person were not joined as a party, or

It is in the interest of justice to do so, or

It is in the public interest to do so.

Given that the sole basis upon which Mr Stankovic seeks to be joined is his assertion that he had a lawful interest (as what he describes as the rightful owner of the property that is the subject of this development application) and asserts no other basis relating to planning matters under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and as the Court of Appeal has confirmed, as I have earlier cited, the decision of Rein J that he has no right, title or interest in that property, it is inevitable that his application must be dismissed and I so dismiss it.

**********

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Namul Pty Limited sought to join The Hills Shire Council as a party to an existing proceeding. The case involved a dispute over land development and planning approval. The primary focus was whether the council's actions constituted a breach of statutory duties under the relevant planning legislation, and whether the applicant had standing to challenge those actions. The legal issues at hand required interpretation of statutory provisions and an examination of the procedural requirements for joining a third party to ongoing litigation.

The court was tasked with determining whether the applicant had a sufficient connection to the existing proceeding to warrant the inclusion of the council as a party. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the application was made in a timely manner and whether the inclusion of the council would unduly prejudice or delay the proceedings. The court examined the legislative framework and case law to establish the criteria for joinder and the principles guiding such decisions.

Upon considering the evidence and legal arguments presented, the court found that the applicant did not have a sufficient nexus to the existing proceeding to justify the joinder of the council. The court held that the application was not made within a reasonable time and that the inclusion of the council would result in undue prejudice and delay. Consequently, the application for joinder was dismissed. This decision was grounded in the statutory requirements for joinder and the overarching principles of procedural fairness and efficiency in litigation.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

Medium Neutral Citation:	Namul Pty Limited v The Hills Shire Council [2016] NSWLEC 152
Hearing dates:	17 November 2016
Date of orders:	17 November 2016
Decision date:	17 November 2016
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Moore J
Decision:	Application for joinder dismissed
Catchwords:	JOINDER – claim of legal interest in land – claim said to found basis for joinder – claim rejected by Supreme Court – appeal against determination dismissed by Courtof Appeal – no other basis asserted to support joinder application – joinder refused
Legislation Cited:	Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 39A Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Cases Cited:	Namul Pty Ltd v Milovan Stankovic [2013] NSWSC 115 Stankovic v Namul Pty Ltd [2013] NSWCA 276
Category:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	Namul Pty Limited (Applicant) The Hills Shire Council (Respondent) Milovan Stankovic (Applicant for Joinder)
Representation:	Counsel: Ms N Rodwell (Applicant) Mr A Hudson (Respondent) Mr M Stankovic (In person) Solicitors: Addisons (Applicant) Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s):	197481 of 2016
Publication restriction:	No