preview

Notes On Stankovic V State Of Nsw

Better Essays

Citation: Stankovic v State of NSW [2016] NSWSC 18
Court: Supreme Court of New South Wales
Judge: Davies J

Material facts:
The Plaintiff had used his property both as a junk yard and to keep one-hundred pigs, which was deemed prohibited under the Baulkham Hills Shire Council Local Environment Plan [4].
The Plaintiff contests that orders to restrain the Plaintiff’s land use [8] by Pain J in the Land and Environment Court of NSW in 2005 constituted the ‘violation of correct legal procedures’ [14] and hence professional negligence, because the case was previously dismissed by Lloyd J [5].
The Plaintiff is claiming $35 million from the State of NSW, which is purported to be vicariously liable for the Land and Environment Court and Pain J [1]. This claim includes nullifying Pain J’s judgment [14], and it is accompanied by Motions to uphold Lloyd J’s dismissal and refund the Plaintiff’s filing fees [2].

Procedural history:
The Council commenced proceedings in the Land and Environment Court, however they were dismissed by Lloyd J on February16 2005 for want of prosecution [5].
The Council filed for reinstatement on February 22 2005 [6]. Upon rehearing on March 14 2005 [7], Pain J ordered the Plaintiff to restrain from his previous property usage [8].
The Plaintiff’s estate was sequestrated in Federal Magistrates Court on May 12 2009, for failure to pay Council court costs [10]. An application by the Plaintiff for an extension in time to appeal this sequestration was

Get Access