The High Court judge found the application failed on three counts.
First, Kowalczyk refused to provide what is known as an undertaking in damages, a standard legal promise that if the court grants the order and it later turns out to have been wrong, the applicant will compensate the other side for any losses caused.
Kowalczyk argued this was unfair given that CDAL was a company with millions of dollars in assets while he was a private individual representing himself.
The judge acknowledged the point but said it was not enough.
Going further, the judge found that even if the undertaking issue were set aside, the balance of the case still favoured CDAL as granting the order would have prevented the company from making its arguments in court, which the judge said was not an appropriate use of emergency injunctive relief.
Courts, the ruling noted, must be free to decide what arguments can be heard before them without being restricted by orders from a separate proceeding.
On the question of utility disconnection, the judge found there was no real evidence that CDAL was about to cut off Kowalczyk’s services, noting the company had kept them running throughout the dispute.
Justice Williams also remarked on the bitter state of relations between the two sides, urging both parties to work on reducing the tension between them as the case continues. Kowalczyk was ordered to pay CDAL $2,000 in costs.
The question over whether the clause in Kowalczyk’s property agreement that requires him to pay community charges is actually binding on him as someone who bought the property rather than the original owner, remains to be decided.