The judge proposed that a substantive application be heard at the same time or immediately following a similar case.
Urban Auckland, a society of architects and planning professionals, has filed a separate case seeking a judicial review challenging the lawfulness of the consents for the extensions.
That case is set down for a hearing on June 2.
In Ms Banks' case, Justice Venning said he was not prepared to deal with the matter on an interim basis, or between now and June 2, saying it would not be an effective or efficient use of the court's time.
The judge said that Jim Farmer, QC, acting for the ports company, had confirmed an undertaking in the Urban Auckland case would apply in the Banks' case.
The undertaking was if the court ruled the consents were unlawful, work on the extensions would stop and if the port company reapplied for consents and they were not granted it would dismantle the structures.
Justice Venning said the concerns of the applicant are genuinely held and maybe representative of a number of Aucklanders.
He said other considerations were the proper interests of the Ports of Auckland in relation to such an important issue as to whether work which is being carried out pursuant to a contract with other parties for which a resource consent had been obtained.
Meanwhile, Auckland councillors are holding a meeting behind closed doors this afternoon to consider a response from the board of Ports of Auckland to a letter asking it to halt work on the extensions while a wide-ranging ports study is done.
ends