Cousins on behalf of Cardwell Country Estate Pty Ltd v Cassowary Coast Regional Council & Ors [2009] QPEC 94

1 [2009] QPEC 94 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT JUDGE EVERSON P&E Appeal No 60 of 2009 RUSSEL KINGSLEY COUSINS ON BEHALF OF CARDWELL COUNTRY ESTATE PTY LTD Appellant and CASSOWARY COAST REGIONAL COUNCIL & ORS Respondents CAIRNS ..DATE 07/10/2009 ORDER -- 1 of 3 -- 2 ORDER 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 HIS HONOUR: This is an application seeking to dismiss for want of prosecution this appeal. It was filed on the 20th of March this year. Therefore, pursuant to rule 18 of the Planning and Environment Court Rules 2008, the appellant, which is the party in this appeal proceeding with the onus, was required as soon as practicable, but within three months after 20 March in 2009, to apply to the Court for an order or directions about this appeal. This did not occur, in fact, the appellant has taken no steps whatsoever in prosecuting this appeal. The application before me was filed on 4 August 2009. There were substantial difficulties serving the appellant. I am satisfied that the appellant has been served. As have the controllers of the appellant appointed pursuant to the Corporations Act 2001. The controllers have indicated that they do not oppose the relief sought in this application and the appellant has simply failed to respond to the application in any way. The respondent seeks to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution pursuant to rule 280 of the Uniform of Civil Procedure Rules 1999, which provide that where a relevant party, in this case the appellant, is required to take a step and does not do what is required within the time stated for doing so, the respondent may apply to the Court for an order dismissing the proceeding for want of prosecution. -- 2 of 3 -- 3 ORDER 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 Rule 280 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules is applicable in this Court pursuant to rule 3 of the Planning and Environment Court Rules. In all of the circumstances I am satisfied that it is appropriate that the appeal be dismissed for want of prosecution. Essentially, what appears to be a state of affairs is what is submitted by Ms Fantin in her written submissions, namely that the appellant has no intention of prosecuting the appeal and has in effect abandoned it. I therefore make an order in terms of the draft which has been provided to me. I will initial that draft and place it with the papers. THE COURT ADJOURNED AT 9.25 A.M. -- 3 of 3 --