Hollingsworth v Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, New South Wales

In *Hollingsworth v Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, New South Wales*, the applicant sought interlocutory relief from the Court of Appeal of New South Wales to preserve horses that had been placed in the possession of the respondent, the RSPCA, following the applicant's conviction for animal cruelty offences in the Local Court. The applicant's appeal to the District Court against the conviction and ancillary orders had been dismissed.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether to grant an interlocutory order to preserve the horses. This required the court to consider the applicant's prospects of success on the substantive application for prerogative relief, which was not clearly articulated.

Barrett JA noted that the applicant had not provided any basis upon which principal relief, such as a writ of certiorari or prohibition, might be granted. Without a discernible legal foundation for the substantive application, the court was unable to find any grounds to grant the interlocutory relief sought. The court applied the general principles governing the grant of interlocutory relief, which require a demonstration of a real question to be tried and a balance of convenience favouring the grant of the order.

Consequently, the notice of motion seeking interlocutory relief was dismissed with costs.