Randren House Pty Ltd v Water Administration Ministerial Corporation (No 2)

In this case, the respondent, Water Administration Ministerial Corporation, applied for an injunction against the appellant, Randren House Pty Ltd, seeking to restrain the appellant from taking any action in relation to a property. The dispute arose due to alleged breaches of a water licence and the appellant's intention to proceed with construction work on the property. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The court had to determine whether the respondent was entitled to an interlocutory injunction to prevent the appellant from proceeding with the construction. The key issues revolved around whether the appellant's actions constituted a breach of the water licence, and whether an injunction was necessary to prevent irreparable harm to the respondent's interests. The court also considered whether the balance of convenience favoured the grant of an injunction.

The court found that the respondent had demonstrated a serious question to be tried regarding the alleged breaches of the water licence. The court held that the respondent had shown that there was a real risk of harm to its interests if the appellant were allowed to proceed with the construction without addressing the alleged breaches. The court concluded that the balance of convenience favoured the grant of an injunction, as the harm to the respondent if the injunction were not granted would outweigh any harm to the appellant. Consequently, the court granted the respondent's application for an interlocutory injunction.