The Court held that the Council's application for costs thrown away following vacation of hearing dates was made too late, as the balancing exercise weighing those costs had already been undertaken in the earlier decision granting the stay (Caterson No 2), and it was inappropriate to revisit that issue. The Court declined to order the successful applicant to pay the respondent's costs of the motion, and ordered each party to bear their own costs of the notice of motion. The public interest costs framework from Caroona No 3 was raised but not determinative, as the result was reached on other grounds.
The full text is available to signed-in members.