| Boral Ltd v Foley & Bear Pty Ltd trading as J&R Industries (NSWCA) - stay - prospects of success - financial position of respondent - stay of judgment pending - appeal refused |
| Ashton Coal Operations Pty Ltd v Hunter Environment Lobby Inc (NSWCA) - environment and planning - conditional approval of open-cut coal mine project - appeal dismissed |
| Rexel Electrical Supplies Pty Ltd v Morton (as liquidator of South East Queensland Machinery Manufacturing and Distribution (Mining No. 1) (in liq) (QCA) - corporations - winding up - unfair preferences transactions voidable - leave to appeal refused |
| Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read) |
Boral Ltd v Foley & Bear Pty Ltd trading as J&R Industries [2015] NSWCA 360
Court of Appeal of New South Wales
Macfarlan JA
Stay - applicant sought stay of judgment entered against it in respondent’s favour - applicant contended primary judge failed to take into account evidence, failed to draw inference adverse to respondent, failed to give adequate reasons for findings, erred in finding applicant supplied products to respondent and made erroneous assessment of damages - held: appeal was not unarguable but did not have strong prospects of success - respondent’s financial position was not such that it might have difficulty paying amount if applicant paid it to respondent and was successful on appeal - no error in assessment of damages or adverse inference to be drawn against respondent - stay refused - notice of motion dismissed.
Boral
|
Ashton Coal Operations Pty Ltd v Hunter Environment Lobby Inc [2015] NSWCA 358
Court of Appeal of New South Wales
Beazley P; Macfarlan & Gleeson JJA
Environment and planning - Minister conditionally approved appellant’s open-cut coal mine project - first respondent appealed against approval - in first judgment primary judge found approval should be granted with conditions to be determined - second judgment determined conditions - appellant appealed pursuant to s57 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) against condition that it must not carry out development work on site until it had purchased, leased or licensed property from owner - held: imposition of condition not an unreasonable exercise of power on basis of inconsistency between the two judgments - condition not inconsistent with s8F(1)(c) Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (NSW) - primary judge’s reason for imposing condition was proper and reasonable planning purpose fairly related to development approved in conformity with Newbury test - appeal dismissed.
Ashton
|
Rexel Electrical Supplies Pty Ltd v Morton (as liquidator of South East Queensland Machinery Manufacturing and Distribution (Mining No. 1) (in liq) [2015] QCA 235
Court of Appeal of Queensland
Fraser & Philippides JJA; A Lyons J
Corporations - winding up - applicant sought to appeal against order that applicant pay respondent amount representing unfair preference transactions which were voidable pursuant to s588FE Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - s95A, 588C, 588E, 588FA, 588FC, & 588FG - s118 District Court of Queensland Act 1967 (Qld) - s4 Magistrates Courts Act 1921 (Qld) - proposed appeal concerned trial judge’s findings that company insolvent at time of payments and that they were not part of a running account for purposes of s 558FA(3) - held: primary judge’s reasons not inadequate - applicant did not succeed in contending primary judge erred in finding company insolvent - no error in findings as to running account - leave to appeal refused
Rexel
|
