Keywords: abandoned appeal; conditional water licence
The Appellants each appealed one of three 1991 decisions of the Deputy Comptroller to substitute one conditional water licence for another. The Appellants also jointly appealed the 1993 decisions of the Deputy Comptroller to issue eight new conditional water licences on Joseph Spring.
At the appeal hearing, the Deputy Comptroller argued that the 1991 appeals were moot because the decisions that were the basis of the appeal had been revoked in 1993, and the original licences had been reinstated. Once the Board determined that there were no objections from the parties present at the hearing, it ruled that the 1991 appeals were moot.
The Appellant, Tim Hadikin, and the Deputy Comptroller advised the Board that, as between them, the 1993 appeals had been resolved, and that the Appellants, Tim and Galena Hadikin, as well as Marie Hadikin, wished to abandon their appeals. After Notices of Abandonment were filed, the Board granted the request to abandon the appeals.
The Deputy Comptroller then requested that the outstanding appeal of Philip and May Kanigan be dismissed as abandoned because they had neither filed a Statement of Points nor attended the hearing. The Board agreed, and dismissed the 1993 appeal of Philip and May Kanigan, due to abandonment.
Therefore, the Board dismissed all of the appeals.