Canterbury City Council v Ahmed

Land and Environment Court New South Wales Amendment notes Medium Neutral Citation: Canterbury City Council v Ahmed [2016] NSWLEC 68 Hearing dates:15, 16 April, 2, 3 and 4 July 2013Date of orders: 03 June 2016 Decision date: 03 June 2016 Jurisdiction:Class 4Before: Craig J Decision: At [62] and Orders Catchwords: CONTEMPT – contravention of court orders – court orders requiring compliance with development consent conditions – unlawful use of premises outside of permitted operating hours – whether defendants contravened court orders – whether use of premises outside of operating hours – whether court orders ambiguous – whether rational alternative hypothesis inconsistent with defendant’s guilt Legislation Cited: Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) Cases Cited: Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Salvato (No 4) [2013] NSWSC 321 Pang v Bydand Holdings Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 69 Waverley Council v Tovir Investments Pty Ltd (No 3) [2013] NSWLEC 35 Category:Principal judgmentParties: Canterbury City Council (Plaintiff) Ali Ahmed (First Defendant) Auto Group Australia Pty Ltd t/as BTA Motorsports (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr T G Howard, barrister (Plaintiff) Mr P Kintominas, barrister (Defendants)   Solicitors: Pikes & Verekers Lawyers (Plaintiff) Samaan & Associates Lawyers (Defendants) File Number(s):165178 of 2016Publication restriction:NoTABLE OF CONTENTSContempt ChargesThe 1990 ConsentConsent Orders are MadeThe FactsThe Land is Leased to Ali AhmedThe Business of BTA MotorsportsControl of the BTA Motorsports BusinessBusiness ExpansionOut of Hours OperationNoise During the Charge PeriodThe “Dyno Machine”The Council’s Complaint RecordRelevant Legal PrinciplesProof Of Possession And ControlLiability of the Second DefendantLiability of the First DefendantOrdersJudgmentContempt Charges Each of Ali Ahmed...