Henderson v Hickling [2010] NSWLEC 213

Henderson v Hickling [2010] NSWLEC 213

The injunction was granted because the absence or existence of approval to construct the fence and remove the hedge raised a serious question to be tried, and the balance of convenience favoured immediate restraint given the urgency, the irrevocable nature of destroying the hedge if relief were refused, and the applicant's usual undertaking as to damages.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Urgent Ex Parte Telephone Application for an Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
Interim injunction granted until 3.00 pm, 15 October 2010.
Legal Topics
['urgent Ex Parte Interim Injunction' 'serious Question to Be Tried' 'balance of Convenience' 'development Approval' 'removal of Hedge and Construction of Fence']
['injunctions' 'environmental and Planning Law'] ['urgent Ex Parte Interim Injunction' 'serious Question to Be Tried' 'balance of Convenience' 'development Approval' 'removal of Hedge and Construction of Fence']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Urgent Ex Parte Telephone Application for an Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Injunction Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was a serious question to be tried as to approval to construct the fence and remove the hedge.' 'Whether the balance of convenience favoured granting an interlocutory injunction restraining removal or cutting of the lilly pilli hedge and construction of the fence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The injunction was granted because the absence or existence of approval to construct the fence and remove the hedge raised a serious question to be tried, and the balance of convenience favoured immediate restraint given the urgency, the irrevocable nature of destroying the hedge if relief were refused, and the applicant's usual undertaking as to damages.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted until 3.00 pm, 15 October 2010.

Orders

  • ['The Court makes an order restraining Mr and Mrs Hickling, by themselves, their employees, contractors or agents from removing or from lopping, trimming or cutting any part of the lilly pilli hedge or constructing the fence between the two properties until 3.00 pm, 15 October 2010.' 'Any extension of the injunction...