The court found that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient grounds for the grant of leave to institute judicial review proceedings, as the respondent did not deny the actions complained of. The court further held that it was appropriate to grant a stay to restrain the respondent from carrying out further activities on the applicant's land for a limited period of 60 days, pending the interpartes hearing of the substantive motion. This was to ensure that the applicant was not prejudiced by further acts of the respondent before the main issues could be determined.