Diaspora Holdings Pty Limited & Anor v The Owners Strata Plan No. 68608

In the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, the plaintiffs, Diaspora Holdings Pty Limited and another, sought to challenge the defendant, The Owners Strata Plan No. 68608, over the operation of a car park. The plaintiffs alleged that the operation of the car park by the defendant constituted an unlawful interference with their trade, contrary to the development application governing the strata plan. The dispute centred on whether the tort of unlawful interference with trade is recognised in Australian common law and, if so, whether the defendant's actions amounted to such a tort.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the plaintiffs' claim for unlawful interference with trade was valid under Australian common law. The plaintiffs argued that the defendant's operation of the car park contravened the development application, thereby interfering with the plaintiffs' lawful trade. The defendant, however, contended that such a claim did not constitute a recognised tort under Australian law and, even if it did, the defendant's actions did not meet the requisite criteria.

The court found that the tort of unlawful interference with trade is not recognised in Australian common law. The plaintiffs' argument that the defendant's operation of the car park contravened the development application did not equate to an unlawful interference with trade. The court emphasised that the plaintiffs' grievances were more appropriately addressed through the statutory framework governing strata titles and development applications rather than through a common law tort. Consequently, the plaintiffs' claim was dismissed, and judgment was entered in favour of the defendant.

The court ordered that the plaintiffs pay the defendant's costs. This decision highlights the importance of adhering to statutory provisions and underscores the limited scope for common law claims in disputes arising under strata titles and development applications.