Equitable Remedies

Question 1

Day v Brownrigg

Answer 1

Remedy is not a cause of action but is sought in support of a recognisable legal or equitable right of action

Question 2

Robinson v Harman

Answer 2

At common law, damages is the ‘remedy of right’

Question 3

Adderley v Dixon

Answer 3

Equity will not award specific performance if damages are sufficient
Will decree specific performance in respect of land as it is unique

Question 4

Verrall v Great Yarmouth BC

Answer 4

Specific performance granted as service (supply of pavilion) was irreplaceable and damages inadequate (could not hold convention)

Question 5

Pusey v Pusey

Answer 5

Completely unique item (King Kanut’s horn) was subject to specific performance

Question 6

Falcke v Gray

Answer 6

Rare Ming vases were subject of specific performance - could not be found on the general market

Question 7

Cohen v Roche

Answer 7

Rare antique chairs were not subject of specific performance because they were ordinary items of commerce with no personal value

Question 8

Behnke v Bede Shipping Co

Answer 8

Specific performance may be granted over a mundane item that has peculiar and practically unique value to the claimant

Question 9

Sky Petroleum v VIP Petroleum

Answer 9

Specific performance granted for petrol during oil crisis due to lack of alternative providers

Question 10

Ryan v Mutual Tontine Westminster Chambers Association

Answer 10

Courts will not award specific performance if it would require constant supervision

Question 11

Posner v Scott-Lewis

Answer 11

Courts will award specific performance if it is easy to define how it may be satisfied

Question 12

Cooperative Insurance v Argyll Stores

Answer 12

Courts will not award specific performance if it would result in constant stream of litigation

Question 13

De Franscesco v Barnum

Answer 13

Courts will not enforce contracts tantamount to slavery - against public policy
Courts will not enforce a contract which could not enforced the other way - no mutuality of obligations

Question 14

Giles v Morris

Answer 14

Courts will not award specific performance if it would lead to imperfections in performance - no specific performance for subjective artistic services

Question 15

Wrotham Park Estate v Parkside Homes

Answer 15

Mandatory injunction to demolish houses built in breach of covenant was refused and damages awared in lieu

Question 16

American Cyanamid v Ethicon

Answer 16

Interim prohibitory injunction requirements:

1) Case must not be frivolous/vexations - serious question to be tried
2) Balance of convenience must be assessed
3) Status quo ante if courts cannot decide
4) May consider merits of the case as last resort - only if one case is disproportionate to the other

Question 17

Morning Star v Express Newspapers

Answer 17

Vexatious claim to try and prevent rival newspaper from trading under a similar name where ‘only a moron in a hurry would confuse them’

Question 18

Fellows and Son v Fisher

Answer 18

Interim prohibitory injunction may be denied if it will cause loss of employment

Question 19

Associated Newspapers v Insert Media

Answer 19

Courts will consider damage to the good will of a business in deciding whether to award an IPI

Question 20

Potters-Ballotini v Weston-Baker

Answer 20

Courts may deny an IPI if it will cause a business to close down

Question 21

Catnic Components v Stressline

Answer 21

Courts may refuse an IPI if it will preserve a substantial investment

Question 22

Garden Cottage Foods v Milk Marketing Board

Answer 22

Status quo ante will tend to favour the claimant as the last change is usually the commencement of the alleged wrong

Question 23

Shepherd Homes v Sandham

Answer 23

If the claimant has delayed, the status quo ante may be the alleged wrong and would favour the defendant
Would also indicate the matter is not urgent and can wait until trial
Interim mandatory requirement: must be a high degree of assurance that at trial it will appear the injunction was rightly granted
Stronger case needed than for an IPI

Question 24

Evans v BBC and IBA

Answer 24

IMI granted to compel defendants to screen party political broadcast - clear that damages would have been inadequate and too time sensitive for specific performance

Question 25

Eads v Williams

Answer 25

No statutory limitation period for bringing an action for specific performance, but delay will defeat an equitable remedy

Question 26

HP Bulmer v Bollinger

Answer 26

Inordinate delay might defeat claim for injunctive relief

Claimant must not acquiesce (must show that the other party has relied on that acquiescence to their detriment)

Question 27

Shaw v Applegate

Answer 27

For acquiescence to deprive a person of their legal rights it must be such that it is dishonest or unconscionable to enforce their legal rights

Question 28

Coatsworth v Johnson

Answer 28

Must have clean hands to seek an equitable remedy - claimant must have performed or be willing to perform all their own obligations

Question 29

Measures v Measures

Answer 29

He who seeks equity must do equity

Question 30

Patel v Ali

Answer 30

Undue hardship to defendant or third party may defeat equitable remedy