2B.7.2 Injunctions Flashcards
What is an injunction?
An order of the court to do/stop doing something.
What happens if the person on whom the injunction is placed fails to follow the terms of the injunction?
They will be in contempt of court and can be punished with a fine or imprisonment for a maximum of two years.
Contempt of court
The failure to follow an order of the court. The court can order a punishment if the failure is serious or continues for a period of time.
What can an injunction be ordered in a case to do?
- to disclose documents
- to not continue an action until a trial has taken place
or - ordered as a final order (a perpetual injunction).
Mandatory injunction
Orders a party to carry out certain actions
e.g. To install sound proofing or an extractor fan to remove offending smells.
What civil cases are injunctions regularly granted?
Nuisance cases - the aim of the injunction is to stop the nuisance continuing.
Will we start seeing the number of injunctions increasing or decreasing in future years?
Following a ruling of the Supreme Court, fewer injunctions can be expected to be granted, especially in cases of nuisance. (Held in Coventry v Lawrence).
If the approach suggested by the Supreme Court is adopted in practice, it is likely that few injunctions will be granted and that damages will become a more common alternative remedy. This could include cases when the loss or inconvenience suffered is slight and the impact on the wrongdoer is severe.
Coventry v Lawrence
The court criticised the tendency to mechanically apply existing principles and to award an injunction. Instead, the Supreme Court endorsed a more flexible approach when awarding a remedy.
Cases where a judge ordered an injunction
- Lim Poh Choo v Camden and Islington AHA
- Heil v Rankin
- Wise v Kane
- Dews v National Coal Board
- Doyle v Wallace
Lim Poh Choo v Camden and Islington AHA
A doctor with good prospects of becoming a consultant suffered irreparable brain damage following an operation. Injury due to negligence of another doctor in hospital. The doctor required total care for the rest of her life and has a life expectancy of 37 years. Remedy: Damages were awarded for loss of future earnings and the price of medical care.
Heil v Rankin
C was a police officer since 1975. In 1987, they witnessed a serious criminal shooting incident. In 1993, they were knocked down by defendant (drunken driver). The defendant developed PTSD, which worsened after the 2nd incident and in 1994 was certified as permanently disabled. Compensatory damages were assessed.
Wise v Kane
Negligent driving of defendants. The claimant (girl aged 20) was rendered unconscious and received serious injuries to her brain. This lessened her expectation of life. She was still unconscious 3 ½ years after the accident and was not expected to recover consciousness.
Remedy: Special and general damages were awarded for loss of earnings.
Dews v National Coal Board
C, a miner employed by the National Coal Board, was injured at work and was on sick leave for 31 weeks. D received no wages and no pension contributions. Claim: Damages for loss of pension contributions.
Remedy: Damages were not awarded and was held that the claimant and was not entitled to do so.
Doyle v Wallace
C, a 19-year-old, had a road traffic accident, causing them to suffer moderately severe brain damage, which left her cognitively impaired and suffering from poor memory and behavioural changed.
