Duncan v Moore and Ors [1999] NSWLEC 170

Duncan v Moore and Ors [1999] NSWLEC 170

There is no serious question to be tried because temporary political signs are exempt from development consent under the relevant planning instruments, and the alleged breach of the Parliamentary Electorates and Elections Act 1912 is a matter within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Disputed Returns. Even if jurisdiction existed, the proceedings are an abuse of process and the balance of convenience does not favour granting an interlocutory injunction.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 1999
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Application / Interlocutory Application for Injunction
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed; previous interlocutory order discharged; costs reserved; proceedings stood over.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'election Posters' 'development Consent' 'jurisdiction' 'abuse of Process']
['environmental Law' 'election Law'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'election Posters' 'development Consent' 'jurisdiction' 'abuse of Process']

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

Class 4 Application / Interlocutory Application for Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the affixing of election posters to power poles requires development consent under relevant environmental planning instruments' 'Whether the Court has jurisdiction to restrain the posting of election posters under s 25(1) of the Environmental Offences and Penalties Act 1989 for alleged breach of the Parliamentary Electorates and Elections Act 1912' 'Whether leave under s 25(3) of the Environmental Offences and Penalties Act 1989 should be set aside for abuse of process' 'Balance of convenience in granting interlocutory injunctive relief']

Ratio Decidendi

There is no serious question to be tried because temporary political signs are exempt from development consent under the relevant planning instruments, and the alleged breach of the Parliamentary Electorates and Elections Act 1912 is a matter within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Disputed Returns. Even if jurisdiction existed, the proceedings are an abuse of process and the balance of convenience does not favour granting an interlocutory injunction.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed; previous interlocutory order discharged; costs reserved; proceedings stood over.

Orders

  • ['Injunction granted on 18 March 1999 discharged' 'No injunction granted for removal of posters' 'Costs reserved' 'Proceedings stood over to 20 April 1999 before Registrar']