Cowell v Rosehill Racecourse Co Ltd

The appellant, Mr Cowell, sued the respondent, Rosehill Racecourse Co Ltd, for damages for assault. The respondent's defence was that the appellant was trespassing on its land and was removed using no more force than necessary. The appellant, by way of an equitable replication, asserted that he had paid for a licence to enter and remain on the racecourse to view races, and that this licence was promised not to be revoked. The respondent demurred to this replication.

The legal issues before the court were whether the licence granted for value created a proprietary interest in the land, and if not, whether equity precluded the respondent from effectively revoking the licence. The court was required to consider the applicability of English decisions, particularly *Wood v. Leadbitter* and *Hurst v. Picture Theatres Ltd*, in the context of New South Wales law, which did not have the Judicature Act in force.

The Full Court of the Supreme Court of New South Wales held that the licence, even though granted for value, created only a contractual right and was revocable at common law. It further held that equity did not prevent the effective revocation of this licence. Consequently, the demurrer was upheld, and judgment was entered for the respondent. The High Court affirmed this decision, finding that the licence did not create a proprietary interest and was revocable. The court distinguished *Hurst v. Picture Theatres Ltd*, finding its reasoning flawed and not applicable to the circumstances, particularly in the absence of the Judicature Act in New South Wales.