South Sydney City Council v Multiplex Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd [1999] NSWLEC 145

South Sydney City Council v Multiplex Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd [1999] NSWLEC 145

Because there was a serious question to be tried, including a concession that condition 65 could not be complied with, and because the balance of convenience favoured regulating the respondent's conduct so as to protect residents' amenity while allowing construction to continue pending final determination, the Court accepted the respondent's undertaking to adhere to the plan of management until further order, upon the applicant giving the usual undertaking as to damages, but did not require the proposed indemnity.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 May 1999
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Relief / Ex Tempore Judgment; Respondent's Undertaking Accepted Until Further Order; Costs Reserved
Outcome
Respondent's undertaking to the Court accepted; applicant's usual undertaking as to damages noted; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Relief' 'development Consent Conditions' 'modification Application' 'plan of Management' 'amenity Impacts' 'undertaking as to Damages']
['planning and Environment' 'civil Procedure'] ['interlocutory Relief' 'development Consent Conditions' 'modification Application' 'plan of Management' 'amenity Impacts' '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

Interlocutory Relief / Ex Tempore Judgment; Respondent's Undertaking Accepted Until Further Order; Costs Reserved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was a serious question to be tried in circumstances where condition 65 was conceded to be incapable of compliance.' "Whether the balance of convenience supported interlocutory relief regulating the respondent's use of Clement Place pending determination of a modification application and final relief." 'Whether the respondent should be required to provide an indemnity as part of the plan of management.' 'Whether the matter should proceed by formal order or by an undertaking to the Court.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because there was a serious question to be tried, including a concession that condition 65 could not be complied with, and because the balance of convenience favoured regulating the respondent's conduct so as to protect residents' amenity while allowing construction to continue pending final determination, the Court accepted the respondent's undertaking to adhere to the plan of management until further order, upon the applicant giving the usual undertaking as to damages, but did not require the proposed indemnity.

Court Disposition

Respondent's undertaking to the Court accepted; applicant's usual undertaking as to damages noted; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Upon the applicant giving the usual undertaking as to damages, the respondent undertakes until further order in the form initialled by the Court and placed with the papers.' 'The undertaking in relation to damages is noted.' 'Costs reserved.' 'The exhibits tendered today are returned.']