The District Court Appeal which was brought by the operator (Sakkara Investment Holdings) against a CTTT Decision in favour of the residents was withdrawn on 6th January 2014. The costs were to be finalised in the District Court on 20th January.
Supreme Court Action. On 20th December 2013 the operator commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court naming the Residents Committee as the First Respondent and the CTTT as the Second Respondent. Sakkara purports to be seeking a judicial review to have the court quash CTTT Orders 25–27. These relate to now-outdated accounting and budgetary matters, and appointment of an auditor, a matter which has been stipulated under different CTTT Orders anyway. CTTT Orders 25–27 may be found HERE.
30 June 2014
The hearing on this matter was held on 16th May 2014 in the Supreme Court before Justice Sackar. The Judge agreed with the residents’ Lawyer, Peter Hill, that the application was made too late, and he also ruled that there were no legal grounds for these appeals in higher courts when the operator could have returned to the Tribunal to have the issue settled. The NSW Caselaw decision of the Supreme Court may be found HERE
The Landings Court Appeals
6 January 2014
The District Court Appeal which was brought by the operator (Sakkara Investment Holdings) against a CTTT Decision in favour of the residents was withdrawn on 6th January 2014. The costs were to be finalised in the District Court on 20th January.
Supreme Court Action. On 20th December 2013 the operator commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court naming the Residents Committee as the First Respondent and the CTTT as the Second Respondent. Sakkara purports to be seeking a judicial review to have the court quash CTTT Orders 25–27. These relate to now-outdated accounting and budgetary matters, and appointment of an auditor, a matter which has been stipulated under different CTTT Orders anyway. CTTT Orders 25–27 may be found HERE.
30 June 2014
The hearing on this matter was held on 16th May 2014 in the Supreme Court before Justice Sackar. The Judge agreed with the residents’ Lawyer, Peter Hill, that the application was made too late, and he also ruled that there were no legal grounds for these appeals in higher courts when the operator could have returned to the Tribunal to have the issue settled. The NSW Caselaw decision of the Supreme Court may be found HERE