| Philip
v JPM Developments Pty Ltd (NSWSC) – easements – substantial
interference with right of carriageway by proposed development works – declaration
and injunction |
| Campbelltown
City Council v WSN Environmental Solutions Pty Ltd (NSWSC)
– contract – dispute resolution regime – declaration that party not entitled to
refer dispute to expert refused |
| Simmons
v Love (WASC) – contract for sale of land – buyers’ claim for
damages for late settlement dismissed |
| Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read) |
Philip v JPM Developments
Pty Ltd [2015]
NSWSC 145
Supreme
Court of New South Wales
Sackar
J
Real
property – easements – plaintiffs sought declaration that defendant owner of
servient tenement would contravene their right of carriageway by carrying out
work under development consent – plaintiff also sought to restrain defendant
from carrying out any work – held: Court satisfied that there would be
substantial interference to plaintiffs’ rights of carriageway if proposed work
went ahead – it was appropriate to grant declaratory and injunctive relief.
Philip
|
Campbelltown City Council v
WSN Environmental Solutions Pty Ltd
[2015] NSWSC 155
Supreme
Court of New South Wales
Sackar
J
Contract
– dispute resolution clause – Councils entered contract with waste management
services company – dispute concerned interaction between two dispute resolution
clauses – Councils sought declaration defendant was not entitled to refer to an
expert a dispute concerning whether it should be compensated for an alleged
reasonably unforeseeable and unforeseen event – construction of contract –
dispute resolution regime – jurisdiction of expert and questions of
commerciality - held: each dispute
resolution regime was to be self-contained - construction proposed by defendant
to be preferred – Councils refused relief sought – appropriate to grant relief
sought by waste management services company.
Campbelltown City Council
|
Simmons
v Love
[2015] WASC 79
Supreme Court of Western Australia
Beech J
Contract for sale of land – buyers
initially sued for specific performance of contract for sale of land – seller initially
defended action on basis contract unenforceable because it contravened Planning and Development Act 2005 (WA)
and that general condition not fulfilled - parties settled on sale and purchase
transaction but were in dispute over amount claimed by buyers as damages for
late settlement, costs of action and costs of earlier proceedings brought by
buyers – held: on date of
settlement buyers were not ready,
willing and able to settle on contract in accordance with its terms – buyers’
claim dismissed – sellers’ counterclaim also dismissed.
Simmons
|
