Project 28 Pty Ltd v Minister for Planning

Project 28 Pty Ltd sought relief from the Supreme Court of New South Wales in an action against the Minister for Planning, regarding a dispute over the Minister’s decision to refuse an application for a development consent. The Applicant sought an order for the Minister to produce certain documents to the Court and to set aside the Minister’s refusal of the development consent. The Respondent sought an order setting aside the Applicant’s Notice to Produce and granting an order that the Applicant pay the Respondent’s costs of the Notice to Produce. Additionally, the Respondent sought an order dismissing the Applicant’s Notice of Motion to strike out the Respondent’s defence and for the Applicant to pay the Respondent’s costs of that Notice of Motion.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the Applicant’s Notice to Produce was appropriate and whether the Respondent’s Notice of Motion should be granted. The Court considered whether the Applicant had established a proper basis for requiring the production of the documents and whether the Minister had acted improperly in refusing the development consent. The Court also had to determine whether the Applicant’s Notice of Motion was appropriate and, if so, whether the Respondent was entitled to costs.

The Court found that the Applicant’s Notice to Produce was not appropriate as the documents were not necessary for the determination of the case and the Court did not consider it appropriate to order their production. The Court further found that the Respondent’s Notice of Motion was well-founded and granted the order setting aside the Notice to Produce and awarding costs to the Respondent. The Court dismissed the Applicant’s Notice of Motion as it found no basis for striking out the Respondent’s defence and ordered each party to bear their own costs of that Notice of Motion.