Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Acorp Developments Pty Ltd v HWR Pty Ltd [2018] NSWLEC 68 Hearing dates: 11, 12 and 13 December 2017 Date of orders: 10 May 2018 Decision date: 10 May 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 3 Before: Robson J Decision: See Conclusion at [181]-[182]; Directions at [183]
Catchwords: EASEMENTS – real property – imposition of easements by the Court under s 88K Conveyancing Act 1919 – where easement is a deferred commencement condition of development consent – right of way and easement for drainage – whether reasonably necessary for effective use or development of dominant tenement – principles of reasonable necessity – whether development substantially preferable with easements rather than without – compensation for loss and disadvantage of servient tenement – whether the Court has the power to make the easements – whether lots constituting the dominant tenement are appurtenant Legislation Cited: Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) s 88K
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) s 4.53
Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) s 40
Roads Act 1993 (NSW) s 6
Ryde Development Control Plan 2014 Pt 4.6
Ryde Local Environmental Plan 2014
State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (NSW) cl 101Cases Cited: 117 York Street Pty Ltd v Proprietors of Strata Plan No 16123 (1998) 43 NSWLR 504; (1998) 98 LGERA 171
Acorp Developments Pty Limited v City of Ryde Council [2016] NSWLEC 1650
Arinson Pty Limited v City of Canada Bay Council [2015] NSWCA 199; (2015) 208 LGERA 418
Arinson Pty Ltd v City of Canada Bay Council [2014] NSWLEC 43; (2014) 205 LGERA 248
Clos Farming Estates v Easton [2002] NSWCA 389
D & D Corak Investments Pty Ltd v Yiasemides [2006] NSWSC 1419
Donnellan v Woodland [2012] NSWCA 433
Effeney v Millar Investments Pty Ltd [2011] NSWSC 708
Gordon v Lever [2018] NSWCA 43
Grattan v Simpson (1998) 9 BPR 16,649
ING Bank (Australia) Ltd v O'Shea [2010] NSWCA 71
Khattar v Wiese [2005] NSWSC 1014
Lonergan v Lewis [2011] NSWSC 1133
Mitchell v Boutagy [2001] NSWSC 1045; (2001) 118 LGERA 249
Moorebank Recyclers Pty Ltd v Tanlane Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 445
Rainbowforce Pty Limited v Skyton Holdings Pty Limited [2010] NSWLEC 2; (2010) 171 LGERA 286
Shi v ABI-K Pty Ltd (2014) 87 NSWLR 568; [2014] NSWCA 293
Spencer v The Commonwealth (1907) 5 CLR 418
Wengarin Pty Ltd v Byron Shire Council [1999] NSWSC 485
Westfield Management Limited v Perpetual Trustee Company Limited (2007) 233 CLR 528
Woodland v Manly Municipal Council [2003] NSWSC 392; (2003) 127 LGERA 120
Zhang v Canterbury City Council (2001) 51 NSWLR 589; [2001] NSWCA 167Category: Principal judgment Parties: Acorp Developments Pty Ltd (Applicant)
HWR Pty Ltd (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
A Galasso SC with M Staunton (Applicant)
M R Hall SC (Respondent)
HWL Ebsworth (Applicant)
Sparke Helmore (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/00203374 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
Introduction
-
Before the Court is a Class 3 application brought by Acorp Developments…
Continue reading Acorp Developments Pty Ltd v HWR Pty Ltd
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Acorp Developments Pty Ltd v HWR Pty Ltd [2018] NSWLEC 68
- Case
- [2018] NSWLEC 68
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Acorp Developments Pty Ltd, the appellant, sought to appeal against the orders of the respondent, HWR Pty Ltd, regarding the settlement of an arbitration agreement. The dispute was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The appellant contested the validity and enforcement of the arbitration agreement, while the respondent sought to enforce the agreement, claiming it was valid and binding.
The primary legal issues before the court involved the interpretation and enforcement of the arbitration agreement. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the arbitration agreement was valid, whether there was a binding agreement to arbitrate, and if the agreement was enforceable against the appellant. Additionally, the court had to consider the procedural fairness in the context of the agreement's enforcement.
In addressing these issues, the court examined the terms of the arbitration agreement, the circumstances under which it was entered into, and the obligations of the parties. The court found that the arbitration agreement was valid and binding, with both parties having clearly agreed to submit to arbitration. The court also held that the agreement was enforceable, considering the established principles of contract law and the absence of any procedural unfairness. The respondent's claim to enforce the agreement was upheld, and the court dismissed the appellant's challenge to the validity of the arbitration agreement.
The primary legal issues before the court involved the interpretation and enforcement of the arbitration agreement. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the arbitration agreement was valid, whether there was a binding agreement to arbitrate, and if the agreement was enforceable against the appellant. Additionally, the court had to consider the procedural fairness in the context of the agreement's enforcement.
In addressing these issues, the court examined the terms of the arbitration agreement, the circumstances under which it was entered into, and the obligations of the parties. The court found that the arbitration agreement was valid and binding, with both parties having clearly agreed to submit to arbitration. The court also held that the agreement was enforceable, considering the established principles of contract law and the absence of any procedural unfairness. The respondent's claim to enforce the agreement was upheld, and the court dismissed the appellant's challenge to the validity of the arbitration agreement.
Orders
Orders of the court
See Conclusion at [181]-[182]; Directions at [183]
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.