Facts: Dispute between neighbors (Lloyds and Johnsons) over drainage issues caused by land modifications, leading to flooding on Lloyd's property.
Issue: Interpretation of a permit condition regarding the maintenance of historical drainage patterns versus prevention of additional drainage onto the Johnson Property.
Court's Ruling: The court concluded that the Lloyds did not make out a strong prima facie case for the injunction they sought. It was determined that any harm they may suffer could be compensated in damages, and the balance of convenience did not favor granting the injunction. Therefore, the court found that the test for a mandatory interlocutory injunction had not been met.
Costs/Damages Awarded: The court ruled that unless the parties sought to make further submissions on the matter, the Johnsons were entitled to their costs in the cause.
