NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision : (2003) NSW ConvR 56-052
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Kazas & Associates Pty Ltd v Multiplex (Mountain Street) Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 840 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Equity FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 3340/02 HEARING DATE(S) : 9 and 10 September, 2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 12 September 2002
PARTIES : Edward Kazas & Associates Pty Ltd - Plaintiff Multiplex (Mountain Street) Pty Ltd - Defendant JUDGMENT OF : Palmer J
COUNSEL : J.S. Wheelhouse - Plaintiff J. Stoljar - Defendant SOLICITORS : Landerer & Co - Plaintiff Clayton Utz - Defendant CATCHWORDS : LEASES - IMPLIED TERM - DEROGATION FROM GRANT - QUIET ENJOYMENT - Quia timet injunctions sought to restrain redevelopment of building in such a way as would interfere with tenant's implied rights - principles upon which term is implied in a lease discussed - whether substantial interference with plaintiff's rights. - Aussie Traveller Pty Ltd v Marklea Pty Ltd [1998] 1 Qd R 1 - BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd v Hastings Shire Council (1977) 52 ALJR 20 - Browne v Flower [1911] 1 Ch 219 - Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority (NSW) (1982) 149 CLR 337 CASES CITED : - Gordon v Lidcombe Developments Pty Ltd [1966] 2 NSWR 9 - "Lessee's Ancillary Rights" Young CJ in Eq (2000) 74 ALJ 384 - Nelson v Walker (1910) 10 CLR 560 - Owen v Gadd [1956] 2 QB 99 - Pwllbach Colliery Co Ltd v Woodman [1915] AC 634 - Todburn Pty Ltd v Taormina International Pty Ltd (1990) 5 BPR 11,173 DECISION : Plaintiff entitled to injunctive relief.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate