Edlington & Anor v Howe & Anor [2017] NSWSC 1715

Edlington & Anor v Howe & Anor [2017] NSWSC 1715

Regardless of whether the arrangement was a licence terminable at will or for a fixed term, the defendants are not entitled to occupy after 21 February 2018, and plaintiffs are entitled to orders for possession effective after that date.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Noel Edlington; Second Plaintiff: Lois Lorraine Edlington; First Defendant: Stuart Howe; Second Defendant: Linda Hurley
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Possession Application / Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Orders for possession granted to plaintiffs; defendants to vacate and remove property by 21 February 2018; costs ordered against defendants.
Legal Topics
Licences, Termination, Possession
Real Property Licences Termination Possession

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Noel Edlington

First Plaintiff

Lois Lorraine Edlington

Second Plaintiff

Stuart Howe

First Defendant

Linda Hurley

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Possession Application / Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants occupy the property under a licence terminable at will or for a fixed term
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to possession of the property

Ratio Decidendi

Regardless of whether the arrangement was a licence terminable at will or for a fixed term, the defendants are not entitled to occupy after 21 February 2018, and plaintiffs are entitled to orders for possession effective after that date.

Court Disposition

Orders for possession granted to plaintiffs; defendants to vacate and remove property by 21 February 2018; costs ordered against defendants.

Orders

  • On or before 21 February 2018 the first and second defendants yield up vacate possession of the Property known as XXX.
  • On or before 21 February 2018 the first and second defendants remove the three relocatable buildings, which they have currently placed on the Property referred to in order 1.