Warringah Council v. Phillip Franks [1998] NSWLEC 104

Warringah Council v. Phillip Franks [1998] NSWLEC 104

Mr Franks and Mr Antoun each disobeyed an order requiring cessation of earthworks, and their conduct was neither casual, accidental nor unintentional. Having regard to the seriousness of obeying court orders and the mitigating circumstances personal to each contemnor, the appropriate punishment was a fine of $15,000 for Mr Franks and $5,000 for Mr Antoun. The council was entitled to costs, but no reason justified indemnity costs, so costs were ordered on a party and party basis and apportioned three quarters to Mr Franks and one quarter to Mr Antoun.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 August 1998
Procedural Posture
Contempt Proceedings Concerning Disobedience of Orders of the Land and Environment Court / Ex Tempore Judgment on Punishment and Costs After Contempt Was Found
Outcome
Fines imposed for contempt; party and party costs awarded to the council and apportioned between Mr Franks and Mr Antoun.
Legal Topics
['disobedience of Court Orders' 'punishment for Contempt' 'interlocutory Order to Cease Earthworks' 'fines' 'party and Party Costs']
['contempt of Court' 'land and Environment' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['disobedience of Court Orders' 'punishment for Contempt' 'interlocutory Order to Cease Earthworks' 'fines' 'party and Party Costs']

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

Contempt Proceedings Concerning Disobedience of Orders of the Land and Environment Court / Ex Tempore Judgment on Punishment and Costs After Contempt Was Found

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What punishment should be imposed on Phillip Franks and Robert Antoun for contempt constituted by breach of an order to cease earthworks, including construction of a rock boulder sea wall.' 'Whether costs of the contempt proceedings should be ordered on an indemnity basis or on a party and party basis.' 'How the costs of the council in relation to the contempt proceedings should be apportioned between Mr Franks and Mr Antoun.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Franks and Mr Antoun each disobeyed an order requiring cessation of earthworks, and their conduct was neither casual, accidental nor unintentional. Having regard to the seriousness of obeying court orders and the mitigating circumstances personal to each contemnor, the appropriate punishment was a fine of $15,000 for Mr Franks and $5,000 for Mr Antoun. The council was entitled to costs, but no reason justified indemnity costs, so costs were ordered on a party and party basis and apportioned three quarters to Mr Franks and one quarter to Mr Antoun.

Court Disposition

Fines imposed for contempt; party and party costs awarded to the council and apportioned between Mr Franks and Mr Antoun.

Orders

  • ['In relation to Mr Phillip Franks, the first respondent, a fine of $15,000 was imposed as punishment for contempt.' 'Mr Franks was ordered to pay the fine to the Registrar of the Court within six months of the judgment date.' 'Mr Franks was ordered to pay three quarters of the costs of the council in relation to...