Gill v Liverpool City Council [2024] NSWLEC 133
Mortgagees of land compulsorily acquired objected to the compensation amount offered. The issue was whether the mortgagees could force joinder of the owner, who had not objected to the offer. The statute said that the court ‘may order that any other person [with an interest] be joined as a party’6.
Pepper J held that ‘may’ in this context meant ‘must’7. The starting point is the presumption that ‘may’ indicates discretion8. Here, the preconditions for joinder were met, so that it must be ordered9. The judge (at [59]) set out 11 non-exhaustive ‘contextual indicia’ to be considered. The decisive factor, it was said, however, ‘is likely to be textual’10.
This principle is from Episode 116 of interpretation NOW!
Footnotes:
6 s 25(2) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), emphasis added.
7 cf Episodes 12, 15, 22, 34 & 92, BDM Modern Statutory Interpretation [36.5].
8 s 9(1) Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), Pearce Interpretation Acts [5.44-5.63].
9 Leach [2007] HCA 3 [38], Finance Facilities (1971) 127 CLR 106 (134).
10 Herzfeld & Prince Interpretation [4.250] cited.