Collins v Pacific Link Housing Limited [2012] NSWSC 1195

Collins v Pacific Link Housing Limited [2012] NSWSC 1195

Although the Plaintiff had a viable prima facie case that there was a serious question to be tried about procedural fairness, the interlocutory injunction was refused because the balance of convenience pointed strongly against keeping the Dunbar Way premises vacant. The Plaintiff's undertaking as to damages would provide little assistance to PLH, there was no evidence of any special or unique feature requiring those particular premises to remain available, refusal of interim relief would not prevent the Plaintiff from proceeding to final hearing or from obtaining meaningful relief, PLH would not advance a futility argument based on her departure, and leaving valuable community housing...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Claim for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief Concerning Termination of a Periodic Residential Tenancy / Interlocutory Application for Injunction
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction refused; Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and claim for interim relief dismissed.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'procedural Fairness' 'termination of Periodic Tenancy Under S.85 Residential Tenancies Act 2010' 'undertaking as to Damages' 'balance of Convenience']
['practice and Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'residential Tenancies' 'social Housing'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'procedural Fairness' 'termination of Periodic Tenancy Under S.85 Residential Tenancies Act 2010' 'undertaking as to Damages' 'balance of Convenience']

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

Claim for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief Concerning Termination of a Periodic Residential Tenancy / Interlocutory Application for Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Plaintiff established a serious question to be tried or viable prima facie case that PLH owed and breached procedural fairness obligations before issuing the s.85 termination notice.' "Whether the Plaintiff's undertaking as to damages, guaranteed to $1,000.00 by the Tenants' Union of New South Wales Co-Op Limited, was sufficient for the interlocutory relief sought." 'Whether damages would be an adequate remedy and whether the balance of convenience favoured restraining PLH from renting 41 Dunbar Way, North Gosford pending final determination.' "Whether keeping the Dunbar Way premises vacant was justified despite PLH's role as a community housing provider and the absence of evidence of any special or unique feature connecting the Plaintiff to those premises."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Plaintiff had a viable prima facie case that there was a serious question to be tried about procedural fairness, the interlocutory injunction was refused because the balance of convenience pointed strongly against keeping the Dunbar Way premises vacant. The Plaintiff's undertaking as to damages would provide little assistance to PLH, there was no evidence of any special or unique feature requiring those particular premises to remain available, refusal of interim relief would not prevent the Plaintiff from proceeding to final hearing or from obtaining meaningful relief, PLH would not advance a futility argument based on her departure, and leaving valuable community housing...

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction refused; Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and claim for interim relief dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The Plaintiff's Notice of Motion filed 29 August 2012 is dismissed." "The Plaintiff's claim for interim relief in paragraph 1 of the Statement of Claim filed 23 August 2012, as varied in paragraph 1 of the draft amended Statement of Claim, is dismissed." 'PLH is discharged from any agreement or undertaking given...