Donovan v Mijuskovic [2007] NSWLEC 650

Land and Environment Court of New South Wales

CITATION : Donovan v Mijuskovic [2007] NSWLEC 650

FIRST APPLICANT: Dr Raymond Donovan

SECOND APPLICANT: Associate Professor Leong Chan

PARTIES : FIRST RESPONDENT: Milenko Mijuskovic

SECOND RESPONDENT: Kate Melhuish

THIRD RESPODNENT: Woollahra Municipal Council

FILE NUMBER(S) : 40925 of 2007

CORAM: Biscoe J

KEY ISSUES: Interlocutory Relief :- ex parte interlocutory injunction to restrain building works said to be unauthorised

DATES OF HEARING: 28 September 2007

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 28 September 2007

APPLICANTS: Mr J Doyle, barrister SOLICITORS Thomson Playford

FIRST RESPONDENT: N/A LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: SECOND RESPONDENT: N/A

THIRD RESPONDENT: Mr M Connell, solicitor SOLICITORS Home Wilkinson Lowry

JUDGMENT: THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES

BISCOE J

28 September 2007

40925 of 2007

DONOVAN AND ANOR. v MIJUSKOVIC & ORS

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT 1 HIS HONOUR: This is an ex parte motion by the applicants in these class 4 proceedings for an interlocutory injunction restraining their next door neighbours, the first and second respondents, until further order from carrying out further building works to property at 168 Sutherland Street, Paddington, without development consent first being obtained for that work. Orders are also sought for substituted service. 2 The Application, which was filed on 19 September 2007, claims declarations that under the Woollahra Local Environmental Plan 1995 certain building works carried out to the subject property, where the first and second respondents reside, were development that could not be lawfully carried out unless and until a development consent under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 had first been obtained and was in force; that no valid development consent has been granted for the works; and that by carrying out the works the first and second respondents breached s 76A of the said Act. The Application also seeks an injunction, including an interlocutory injunction, that the first and second respondents be restrained from carrying out any further works to the property without development consent first being obtained for that work or until further order of the Court.