Lake Macquarie Conveyancing Pty Ltd v Foxbrentin Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 790

Lake Macquarie Conveyancing Pty Ltd v Foxbrentin Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 790

The evidence disclosed that there are serious questions to be tried regarding the rightful ownership of the property and shares in LMC, and, absent continued restraints, the plaintiffs would likely suffer irreparable harm that damages would be unlikely to compensate. The balance of convenience lies strongly in favour of maintaining the status quo via interim injunctions restraining first to fourth defendants from dealing with the property, practice or shares, and requiring rent to be paid into court, pending a final determination.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Continuation of Interim Injunctions
Outcome
Interim injunctions granted pending further order. Costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['interim Injunctions' 'serious Question to Be Tried' 'balance of Convenience' 'dispute as to Property and Shares Ownership' 'practice and Procedure']
['equity'] ['interim Injunctions' 'serious Question to Be Tried' 'balance of Convenience' 'dispute as to Property and Shares Ownership' 'practice and Procedure']

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

Interlocutory Application / Application for Continuation of Interim Injunctions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether plaintiffs are entitled to interim injunctions to restrain first to fourth defendants from dealing with property, practice or shares pending final determination' 'Whether there is a serious question to be tried as to ownership of property and shares in LMC' 'Where the balance of convenience lies for the granting of interim relief']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence disclosed that there are serious questions to be tried regarding the rightful ownership of the property and shares in LMC, and, absent continued restraints, the plaintiffs would likely suffer irreparable harm that damages would be unlikely to compensate. The balance of convenience lies strongly in favour of maintaining the status quo via interim injunctions restraining first to fourth defendants from dealing with the property, practice or shares, and requiring rent to be paid into court, pending a final determination.

Court Disposition

Interim injunctions granted pending further order. Costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['First to fourth defendants are restrained, until further order, from: (a) dealing with clients of the first plaintiff, (b) holding out transfer of ownership of the practice, (c) disparaging first or second plaintiff, (d) disposing/encumbering/dealing with the property, (e) dealing with or encumbering the...