Buddhist Society of WA Inc v Bristile Ltd & Anor

The Buddhist Society of WA Inc (the applicant) sought an interlocutory injunction against Bristile Ltd and another (the respondents) to restrain them from continuing construction of a brickworks on land adjacent to the applicant's temple. The applicant alleged that the brickworks would cause nuisance by emitting dust, noise, and fumes, thereby interfering with the quiet enjoyment of its property and its religious practices. The matter came before McHugh J in chambers.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had established a sufficient likelihood of success in its claim for a permanent injunction to warrant the grant of an interlocutory injunction. This involved assessing whether the apprehended nuisance was likely to be substantial and unreasonable, and whether damages would be an inadequate remedy for the interference with the applicant's use and enjoyment of its land and its religious activities.

McHugh J considered the principles governing the grant of interlocutory injunctions, particularly the balance of convenience and the need to preserve the status quo pending a final determination of the case. His Honour noted that the applicant bore the onus of demonstrating a serious question to be tried and that the balance of convenience favoured the grant of an injunction. The court weighed the potential harm to the applicant from the continuation of construction against the potential economic loss to the respondents if construction were halted.

The court ultimately refused to grant the interlocutory injunction. McHugh J found that the applicant had not established a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits to justify the drastic remedy of an interlocutory injunction, particularly given the potential prejudice to the respondents. The balance of convenience did not favour the applicant, and the court determined that damages would likely be an adequate remedy should the applicant succeed at trial.