Littore and Anor v Rabobank Australia Limited and Ors [2016] NSWLEC 37

Littore and Anor v Rabobank Australia Limited and Ors [2016] NSWLEC 37

Even assuming that the applicants could satisfy the serious-question requirement, the statutory compensation remedy under s 71X(6) of the Water Management Act 2000 and the evidence as to the alleged sale-price deficiency showed that damages would provide an adequate remedy; therefore there was no proper basis to continue the restraining order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Proceedings; Notice of Motion Seeking Restraining Order Concerning Water Access Licences / Further Consideration of Whether an Interim Injunction Granted Ex Parte Should Be Continued
Outcome
Interim restraining order discharged and Amended Notice of Motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
['interim Injunction' 'ex Parte Urgent Application' 'water Access Licences' 'adequacy of Damages' 'security Holder Obligations']
['water Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['interim Injunction' 'ex Parte Urgent Application' 'water Access Licences' 'adequacy of Damages' 'security Holder Obligations']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 2 Proceedings; Notice of Motion Seeking Restraining Order Concerning Water Access Licences / Further Consideration of Whether an Interim Injunction Granted Ex Parte Should Be Continued

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the interim restraining order preventing transfer of water access licences should be continued.' 'Whether there was a serious question to be tried.' 'Whether damages would provide an adequate remedy if the water access licences were transferred.']

Ratio Decidendi

Even assuming that the applicants could satisfy the serious-question requirement, the statutory compensation remedy under s 71X(6) of the Water Management Act 2000 and the evidence as to the alleged sale-price deficiency showed that damages would provide an adequate remedy; therefore there was no proper basis to continue the restraining order.

Court Disposition

Interim restraining order discharged and Amended Notice of Motion dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The order made by Moore J on 17 February 2016, being order (3) of those orders, restraining the transfer of Water Access Licences 5232, 9315, 9316, 30005 and 3715 is discharged.' 'The Amended Notice of Motion (for which amendment was permitted on 17 February 2016) is dismissed.']