Seven Network Ltd v QIC Pty Ltd [2012] NSWLEC 201

Seven Network Ltd v QIC Pty Ltd [2012] NSWLEC 201

The Court granted a limited interim injunction because Seven's evidence, particularly Mr Cooper's acoustic evidence together with the disruption experienced on 18 August 2012, established an arguable apprehended breach of condition (32) of the development consent. Although there had been some delay, it was effectively measured in hours after the relevant works schedule was provided, damages and lease-based remedies were not shown to be adequate, and preserving the status quo justified a short, targeted restraint confined to the identified noisy works in areas 5 and 9 until noon on 27 August 2012.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Civil Enforcement Proceedings Seeking an Urgent Interlocutory Injunction / Notice of Motion for Interlocutory Injunction; Hearing Proceeded Ex Parte as Against the Second Respondent
Outcome
Interim injunction granted; notice of motion stood over; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['urgent Interlocutory Injunction' 'construction Noise' 'apprehended Breach of Development Consent' 'serious Question to Be Tried' 'balance of Convenience' 'undertaking as to Damages']
['environmental Planning and Development Control' 'civil Enforcement' 'injunctions'] ['urgent Interlocutory Injunction' 'construction Noise' 'apprehended Breach of Development Consent' 'serious Question to Be Tried' 'balance of Convenience' 'undertaking as to Damages']

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 Civil Enforcement Proceedings Seeking an Urgent Interlocutory Injunction / Notice of Motion for Interlocutory Injunction; Hearing Proceeded Ex Parte as Against the Second Respondent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Seven had an arguable case that the proposed noisy works would breach condition (32) of the development consent regulating construction noise.' 'Whether the balance of convenience favoured granting an urgent interim injunction despite alleged delay and the contention that damages were an adequate remedy.' 'Whether any restraint should be limited by time, location and the particular works identified in the works schedule.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court granted a limited interim injunction because Seven's evidence, particularly Mr Cooper's acoustic evidence together with the disruption experienced on 18 August 2012, established an arguable apprehended breach of condition (32) of the development consent. Although there had been some delay, it was effectively measured in hours after the relevant works schedule was provided, damages and lease-based remedies were not shown to be adequate, and preserving the status quo justified a short, targeted restraint confined to the identified noisy works in areas 5 and 9 until noon on 27 August 2012.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted; notice of motion stood over; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Upon the applicant, by its counsel, giving the usual undertaking as to damages the respondents by themselves, their employees, agents, contractors and sub-contractors be restrained until 12.00 noon on Monday 27 August 2012 from carrying out development at or in proximity to the building known as 52 Martin Place,...