Summary
In a housing-development amenities dispute, the High Court ordered attachment and sale of partners’ personal properties and other coercive measures. After noting disputed responsibility for development charges and interim steps toward electricity supply, the Supreme Court set the order aside and remanded for fresh consideration with sufficient opportunity to both sides.
Issues
- Whether the amenities dispute and coercive directions should be reconsidered after a fuller opportunity to the parties.
Held
- Responsibility for external development and electricity, water and sewerage charges, including whether purchasers had already paid, remained disputed. The Court declined to determine those merits in the appeal. (¶ 9–13)
- Although prior failures to complete works explained the High Court’s strong response, subsequent steps toward electricity supply warranted a further opportunity to resolve the dispute and facilitate project completion. Fresh consideration with sufficient opportunity to both sides was required. (¶¶ 6–8, 13–14)
Result
Appeal allowed without costs; impugned High Court order set aside and matter remanded for fresh consideration after sufficient opportunity to both parties. No opinion expressed on substantive liability for development charges.