Williams v Director General National Parks and Wildlife Services and Ors. [2003] NSWLEC 252

Williams v Director General National Parks and Wildlife Services and Ors. [2003] NSWLEC 252

The interim injunction was refused because granting it would effectively reinstate and undermine the earlier permanent injunction that had already been varied to permit Dr Pardoe's activities and then discharged; activities under the s 87 permit had already commenced; the status quo included those activities and the permit regime for discovery, collection and safe custody of relics; and the proposed appeal grounds were not self-evidently strong or sound. The alternative application to direct suspension of the permit was refused for the same reasons previously given when that application was made without notice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Motion in Proceedings Challenging the Validity of a Permit Granted Under National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, S 87 / Interlocutory Application for Injunction Pending Summons for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal
Outcome
Application refused.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'stay Pending Appeal' 'national Parks and Wildlife Act Permit' 'relics' 'status Quo Pending Appeal']
['practice and Procedure' 'environmental Law'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'stay Pending Appeal' 'national Parks and Wildlife Act Permit' 'relics' 'status Quo Pending Appeal']

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

Motion in Proceedings Challenging the Validity of a Permit Granted Under National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, S 87 / Interlocutory Application for Injunction Pending Summons for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should grant an interim injunction restraining the second, third and fourth respondents from carrying out activity in reliance on a permit granted under National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, s 87 pending an application for leave to appeal.' 'Whether the status quo justified restraining activities under the s 87 permit where the earlier permanent injunction had been varied and discharged and activities under the permit had commenced.' 'Whether an urgent order should be made directing the Director General to suspend the operation of the s 87 permit.']

Ratio Decidendi

The interim injunction was refused because granting it would effectively reinstate and undermine the earlier permanent injunction that had already been varied to permit Dr Pardoe's activities and then discharged; activities under the s 87 permit had already commenced; the status quo included those activities and the permit regime for discovery, collection and safe custody of relics; and the proposed appeal grounds were not self-evidently strong or sound. The alternative application to direct suspension of the permit was refused for the same reasons previously given when that application was made without notice.

Court Disposition

Application refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for interim injunction is refused.' 'The alternative claim for an urgent order directing the Director General to suspend the operation of the permit granted under s 87 is refused.']