Emprja Pty Ltd v Red Engine Group Pty Ltd

Case [2017] QSC 33

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Emprja Pty Ltd v Red Engine Group Pty Ltd [2017] QSC 33

PARTIES:

EMPRJA PTY LTD CAN 135 384 039

(applicant)

v

RED ENGINE GROUP PTY LTD ACN 006 338 941

(respondent)

FILE NO:

BS7790/16

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Originating Application

DELIVERED ON:

13 March 2017

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

6 October 2016

JUDGE:

Jackson J

ORDER:

The order of the court is that:

1.   An injunction is granted and the respondent is restrained from berthing or mooring Pelicans in berth 029 at the applicant’s marina from 10 April 2017.

2.   The respondent pay the applicant’s costs of the proceeding.

CATCHWORDS:

TORTS – TRESPASS – TRESPASS TO LAND AND RIGHTS OF REAL PROPERTY – WHAT CONSTITUTES TRESPASS AND DEFENCES THERETO – where the applicant was the registered lessee of a marina under a head lease of crown land from the state – where the respondent was the registered sublessee of a marina berth from the applicant – where the respondent’s boat was moored in the subleased berth and the outer side of its hull protruded over the boundary of the sublease – whether the respondent thereby trespassed on the applicant’s land

CONTRACTS – GENERAL CONTRACTUAL PRINCIPLES – CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACTS – INTERPRETATION OF MISCELLANEOUS CONTRACTS AND OTHER MATTERS – where the respondent was the registered sublessee of a marina berth from the applicant – where the sublease provided that a vesselmoored in the berth must have dimensions appropriate to the berth - where the repondent’s boat was moored in the subleased berth and the outer side of its hull protruded beyond the width of the berth– whether the respondent thereby breached the provision of the sublease

TORTS – TRESPASS – TRESPASS TO LAND AND RIGHTS OF REAL PROPERTY – REMEDIES – INJUNCTION – where the respondent trespassed on the applicant’s land by mooring a boat such that its outer side of the hull protruded over the boundary of a subleased berth – where the applicant applies for an injunction to prevent the respondent from berthing the boat in the sublease – whether the injury to the applicant was small and disproportionate to the detriment to the respondent if an injunction were granted – whether  damages should be awarded instead of an injunction

Civil Proceedings Act 2011 (Qld), s 8

Break Fast Investments Pty Ltd v PCH Melbourne Pty Ltd (2007) 20 VR 311, considered
Jaggard v Sawyer [1995] 1 WLR 269, considered
Lawrence v Fen Tigers [2014] AC 822, considered
Mount Bruce Mining Pty Limited v Wright Prospecting Pty Limited (2015) 256 CLR 104, applied
Plenty v Dillon (1991) 171 CLR 635, considered

Shelfer v City London Electric Lighting Co [1895] 1 Ch 287, discussed

COUNSEL:

G Beacham QC and M Long for the applicant

P Hastie QC for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Tresscox Lawyers for the applicant

WMB Lawyers for the respondent

  1. JACKSON J:  This is an application for injunctive relief either to require the respondent…

Continue reading Emprja Pty Ltd v Red Engine Group Pty Ltd

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Emprja Pty Ltd v Red Engine Group Pty Ltd [2017] QSC 33
Case
[2017] QSC 33
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Emprja Pty Ltd sought relief against Red Engine Group Pty Ltd in the Supreme Court of Queensland over an alleged trespass to land, a breach of a sublease agreement, and the granting of an injunction. Emprja was the registered lessee of a marina under a head lease of crown land from the state, while Red Engine was the registered sublessee of a marina berth from Emprja. The dispute arose when Red Engine moored a boat in the subleased berth, causing the outer side of its hull to protrude over the boundary of the sublease. Emprja claimed that this constituted a trespass and a breach of the sublease, and sought an injunction to prevent Red Engine from berthing the boat in the sublease.

The court was required to determine whether Red Engine’s actions constituted a trespass to land and whether they breached the sublease agreement. The court also had to consider whether an injunction should be granted instead of damages. In relation to the trespass claim, the court found that Red Engine’s actions constituted a trespass as they intentionally entered Emprja’s land without permission. The court also found that Red Engine breached the sublease agreement by mooring a vessel that did not have dimensions appropriate to the berth. The court considered whether an injunction was the appropriate remedy, and whether damages should be awarded instead. The court found that the injury to Emprja was not small and disproportionate to the detriment to Red Engine if an injunction were granted.

The court granted an injunction and restrained Red Engine from berthing or mooring the boat in the subleased berth from 10 April 2017. The court also ordered Red Engine to pay Emprja’s costs of the proceeding. The court found that Emprja was entitled to an injunction as the injury to them was not trivial and the detriment to Red Engine if an injunction were granted was not disproportionate. The court did not award damages in lieu of an injunction.

Orders

Orders of the court

The order of the court is that:

1. An injunction is granted and the respondent is restrained from berthing or mooring Pelicans in berth 029 at the applicant’s marina from 10 April 2017.

2. The respondent pay the applicant’s costs of the proceeding.

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.