Metropolitan Petar v Mitreski

Metropolitan Petar and the Holy Synod of Bishops of the Macedonian Orthodox Church sought an interlocutory injunction against Mitreski and others to restrain them from using a church building and its associated property, which were subject to a charitable trust. The dispute arose from conflicting claims of ecclesiastical authority over the church property, with the applicants asserting their right to manage the property in accordance with the terms of the charitable trust. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The court had to determine whether it was appropriate to grant the applicants an interlocutory injunction to restrain the respondents from using the church property. The legal issues included the balance of convenience, the irreparable harm that might occur if the injunction were not granted, and the extent to which the applicants had demonstrated a prima facie case in the final determination of the dispute.

The court found that the applicants had demonstrated a serious issue to be tried, and that the balance of convenience favoured the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The applicants had established that the church property was subject to a charitable trust, and that the respondents were in breach of that trust by using the property without the applicants' consent. The court was also satisfied that the applicants would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction were not granted, as the respondents' continued use of the property could lead to significant damage to the property and the applicants' reputation. Accordingly, the court granted the interlocutory injunction.

The Federal Court of Australia made an order that Mitreski and others be restrained from using the church building and its associated property, including by entering the premises, until the final determination of the proceedings. The order also included provisions for the applicants to be given notice of any attempts by the respondents to use the property, and for the respondents to deliver up any keys or other means of access to the applicants. The injunction was to remain in force until the final hearing of the matter, or until further order of the court.