NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Sugar Australia Limited v Conneq [2011] NSWSC 805 Hearing dates: 13/07/2011 Decision date: 13 July 2011 Jurisdiction: Equity Division - Technology and Construction List Before: McDougall J Decision: Interlocutory injunction refused. Proceedings stayed for 42 days, thereafter to be transferred to the Supreme Court of Victoria. Catchwords: CONTRACT - interlocutory application - injunction sought to prevent termination of contract - whether parties should be left to resolve consequences of termination according to mechanisms within the contract - whether specific performance appropriate relief in building contracts. PROCEDURE - contract contains mandatory dispute resolution procedure - whether proceedings should be stayed to that procedure to be followed. PROCEDURE - jurisdiction - whether proceedings ought to be transferred to Supreme Court of Victoria pursuant to s 5(2) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (NSW) - factors for consideration in determining whether proceedings ought to be transferred. Legislation Cited: Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (NSW) Occupational Health and Safety Regulations 2007 (VIC) Cases Cited: Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill (2006) 227 CLR 57 Crouch Developments Pty Ltd v D & M (Australia) Pty Ltd [2008] WASC 151 Patrick Stevedores Operations No 2 Proprietary Limited v Maritime Union of Australia (1998) 195 CLR 1 Wolverhampton Corporation v Emmons [1901] 1 KB 515 Texts Cited: Carter's Breach of Contract 3rd ed, (2011) Contract Law in Australia (5th ed, 2007) Doctrines and Remedies (4th ed, 2002) Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (NSW) Meagher, Gummow and Lehane's Equity Category: Principal judgment Parties: Sugar Australia Pty Ltd ACN 081 245 169 (Plaintiff) Conneq Infrastructure Services (Australia) Pty Ltd ACN 081 540 847 (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: F C Corsaro SC / D L Cook / T Cogley (Plaintiff) B W Collins QC / C N Bova (Defendant) Solicitors: Herbert Geer (Plaintiff) Mallesons Stephen Jaques (Defendant) File Number(s): 2011/214730
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