ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — application to review the legality of various decisions relating to the plaintiffs’ strata management licences and business — second plaintiff in liquidation — proceedings brought by second plaintiff dismissed — where the determinative issue in the plaintiff’s case is the legality of a search warrant — application out of time — no application made for extension of time — no basis for extension of time established — plaintiff’s case would have anyway failed as the invalidity of the original suspensions had no bearing on the subsequent issuing of the search warrant — proceedings in any event would have been dismissed for failure to take available administrative action — proceedings also futile
Quick Take
1Where a judicial review challenge to a search warrant is brought outside the three-month limitation period in UCPR r 59.10 and no application for extension of time is made, the court is not obliged to grant an extension of its own motion, particularly where the limitation issue was squarely raised by the respondent and the applicant had assistance in preparing submissions.
2A concession by a regulator that an earlier suspension decision was invalid due to a delegation deficiency does not negate the underlying factual complaints, and the failure to disclose that concession in a subsequent ex parte search warrant application does not render the warrant unlawful where the complaints themselves remained viable.
3Under s 34(1) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), the Supreme Court may refuse to conduct judicial review where adequate provision exists for administrative review in NCAT, and a deliberate withdrawal from available NCAT proceedings without full explanation weighs strongly in favour of refusal.
