Lagudi Holdings Pty Ltd v Horizon Pty Ltd & ors [2009] NSWSC 240

Lagudi Holdings Pty Ltd v Horizon Pty Ltd & ors [2009] NSWSC 240

Clause 14.4 of the lease, construed in light of the extended definition of 'Licence' to include s 56 authorisations under the Gaming Machines Act, imposes an obligation on the lessee to do everything in its power to maintain the authorisation. The proposed transfer of PMEs would result in extinction of the authorisation, thereby breaching clause 14.4, justifying injunctive relief. Other lease clauses are not contravened as they either do not apply or do not require licence maintenance for ceased activities.

Parties
Plaintiff: Lagudi Holdings Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Horizon Iris Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: Alan Lloyd Riley; Third Defendant: Casino, Liquor & Gaming Control Authority
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Injunction Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Injunction granted restraining defendants from prosecuting the PME transfer application and ordering withdrawal of that application; costs awarded to plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Lease Interpretation, Poker Machine Entitlements, Licence Maintenance Covenants, Injunctions, Hotel Licensing
Property Law Contract Law Gaming and Wagering Lease Interpretation Poker Machine Entitlements Licence Maintenance Covenants Injunctions Hotel Licensing

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lagudi Holdings Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Horizon Iris Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Alan Lloyd Riley

Second Defendant

Casino, Liquor & Gaming Control Authority

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Injunction Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lessee is contractually obliged to maintain the s 56 authorisation for poker machines after ceasing gaming operations
  2. 2 Whether the transfer of Poker Machine Entitlements (PMEs) by the lessee contravenes the lease covenants, particularly clause 14.4
  3. 3 Whether PME is a 'licence' within the meaning of the lease terms

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 14.4 of the lease, construed in light of the extended definition of 'Licence' to include s 56 authorisations under the Gaming Machines Act, imposes an obligation on the lessee to do everything in its power to maintain the authorisation. The proposed transfer of PMEs would result in extinction of the authorisation, thereby breaching clause 14.4, justifying injunctive relief. Other lease clauses are not contravened as they either do not apply or do not require licence maintenance for ceased activities.

Court Disposition

Injunction granted restraining defendants from prosecuting the PME transfer application and ordering withdrawal of that application; costs awarded to plaintiff.

Orders

  • First and second defendants restrained from taking any steps to prosecute the application lodged on 13 February 2009 for the transfer of Poker Machine Entitlements and to withdraw that application within seven days.
  • First and second defendants to pay the plaintiff's costs.