The company planning a new waste transfer operation in Fyshwick is appealing an "unprecedented" decision by ACT authorities to revoke a development application approval.
Capital Recycling Solutions lodged an application for appeal in the ACT Supreme Court on August 30.
A directions hearing is scheduled for Thursday.
In April 2017, the Planning and Land Authority approved a Capital Recycling Solutions development application for the construction of a hard stand structure and associated works, including a rail siding, on land between the railway line and the Ipswich Street block where the proposed facility would be built.
Capital Recycling Solutions plans to divert 90 per cent of the rubbish from the Mugga Way landfill site to Fyshwick, then use the railway to send the recyclable material it recovered to destinations including Port Botany.
The company believes it can save 60,000 tonnes of recyclable material per year from going to landfill, with the leftover material to be transported by rail to the Woodlawn bioreactor at Tarago.
The development approval was issued despite IZ2 industrial zoning, which prohibits railway use on the land in question, and the fact that Capital Recycling Solutions never completed the purchase of that land from the ACT government.
The Planning and Land Authority conducted an internal review and revoked the development approval on August 2 after finding the application should never have been approved.
In another decision on August 16, the authority affirmed the decision to revoke approval.
The Supreme Court appeal application, filed by Sydney solicitor Luke Walker on behalf of Capital Recycling Solutions, seeks an order to declare the August decisions void, or set them aside.
The application lists three grounds for appeal: that the Planning and Land Authority did not have jurisdiction to make the August decisions, that the decisions breached the rules of natural justice, or that the decisions were an improper exercise of power under the Planning and Development Act.
Capital Recycling Solutions director Adam Perry did not want to comment on the appeal, other than to say he hoped to reach a positive outcome.
"We believe our position is the right one and I'm confident we'll resolve it," Mr Perry said.
When the development consent was withdrawn in August, Mr Perry described the decision as highly irregular and possibly unprecedented.
The outcome of the appeal is critical for the planned waste operation, which has already endured a major setback.
When Capital Recycling Solutions originally announced its Fyshwick vision, it had planned to build a $200 million incinerator and recycling plant.
After community opposition, the company delayed the incinerator plans and decided to instead focus on the proposal to move rubbish by rail.
Those plans were also thrown into jeopardy when the Planning and Land Authority reversed its development approval decision, leading to Capital Recycling Solutions' move to mount a Supreme Court challenge.
According to a draft environmental impact statement prepared by Purdon Planning for Capital Recycling Solutions in April, the proposed Fyshwick material recoveries facility would create 48 full-time jobs, 10 part-time jobs and more than 80 construction jobs.