Manly Council -V- Angelo [1999] NSWLEC 16

Manly Council -V- Angelo [1999] NSWLEC 16

The Respondent had admitted that the Court's orders had not been complied with, affidavit evidence showed that no required work had been carried out, and the non-compliance was deliberate and intentional rather than casual, unintentional or accidental. Accordingly, even accepting the asserted financial difficulties, the disobedience was wilful and constituted contempt of Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 February 1999
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Seeking Punishment for Contempt of Court for Disobedience of Court Orders / Ex Parte Determination of Contempt; Question of Penalty, Sentence and Costs Reserved
Outcome
Respondent found guilty of contempt of Court as alleged; penalty, sentence and costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['disobedience of Court Orders' 'wilful Non Compliance' 'non Appearance of Alleged Contemnor' 'penalty Reserved']
['contempt of Court' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['disobedience of Court Orders' 'wilful Non Compliance' 'non Appearance of Alleged Contemnor' 'penalty Reserved']

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

Notice of Motion Seeking Punishment for Contempt of Court for Disobedience of Court Orders / Ex Parte Determination of Contempt; Question of Penalty, Sentence and Costs Reserved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Respondent was guilty of contempt of Court by failing to comply with orders made on 10 July 1995 requiring reconstruction of the roof and ancillary works at 69 Wood Street, Manly.' "Whether the Court should proceed despite the Respondent's non-appearance, relying on his previous admissions and affidavit evidence of continued non-compliance." 'Whether financial difficulty prevented the non-compliance from being wilful for the purposes of contempt.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Respondent had admitted that the Court's orders had not been complied with, affidavit evidence showed that no required work had been carried out, and the non-compliance was deliberate and intentional rather than casual, unintentional or accidental. Accordingly, even accepting the asserted financial difficulties, the disobedience was wilful and constituted contempt of Court.

Court Disposition

Respondent found guilty of contempt of Court as alleged; penalty, sentence and costs reserved.

Orders

  • ["The Respondent Danny Peter Angelo is found guilty of the contempt of Court alleged in the Council's Notice of Motion filed on 12 March 1998." 'The question of penalty and sentence and costs is reserved.' 'The reserved questions are to be considered on 17 March 1999 at 9.30am.' 'The Council is directed to notify Mr...