Coutts and Company & Ors v Collins & Ors [2014] NICh 24 (24 October 2014)

Coutts and Company & Ors v Collins & Ors [2014] NICh 24 (24 October 2014)

The plaintiffs have established a serious issue to be tried regarding ownership and entitlement to develop the land, but the defendants have substantial grazing rights that may be interfered with by the proposed works. The balance of convenience and adequacy of damages are finely balanced, but an interlocutory injunction is justified, with conditions to mitigate harm to defendants' livestock and business, pending trial.

Citation
[2014] NICh 24
Parties
First Plaintiff: Coutts and Company (as Trustee of the Estate of FitzHenry Augustus Smith (Deceased)); Second Plaintiff: SSE Renewables Developments UK Limited; First Defendant: John Collins; Second Defendant: Martin Collins; Third Defendant: Brendan Douglas; Fourth Defendant: Barry Douglas
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
24 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Injunction Application / Interlocutory (pending Trial)
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted in part, pending trial
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Profits À Prendre, Grazing Rights, Derogation From Grant, Wind Farm Development, Balance of Convenience
Property Law Equity Land Law Interlocutory Injunctions Profits À Prendre Grazing Rights Derogation From Grant Wind Farm Development +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Coutts and Company (as Trustee of the Estate of FitzHenry Augustus Smith (Deceased))

First Plaintiff

SSE Renewables Developments UK Limited

Second Plaintiff

John Collins

First Defendant

Martin Collins

Second Defendant

Brendan Douglas

Third Defendant

Barry Douglas

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Injunction Application / Interlocutory (pending Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs have established a serious issue to be tried regarding ownership and entitlement to develop Ballymongan Mountain
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from obstructing access and works
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' grazing and turbary rights preclude the plaintiffs' proposed development

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs have established a serious issue to be tried regarding ownership and entitlement to develop the land, but the defendants have substantial grazing rights that may be interfered with by the proposed works. The balance of convenience and adequacy of damages are finely balanced, but an interlocutory injunction is justified, with conditions to mitigate harm to defendants' livestock and business, pending trial.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted in part, pending trial

Orders

  • Defendants restrained from obstructing or preventing plaintiffs' access to Ballymongan Mountain as per paragraph 1 of notice of motion.
  • Plaintiffs' vehicular access limited to 3 mph; advance notice to defendants required; vehicle operations to be coordinated to minimize impact on sheep.