EXAM NOTES - Equitable Remedies Flashcards

1
Q

why do people have the right to a remedy?

A

remedies arise out the infringement of a recognisable legal or equitable right
- Day v Brownrigg

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

define specific performance and give the general test

A
  • Order to perform positive contractual obligations

- Test: Adderly v Dixon – are damages an inadequate remedy here?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

how does the court determine if SP is appropriate for sale of goods contracts?

A
  • if the item is unique, SP usually granted
  • Cohen v Roche; antique chairs were ‘ordinary articles of commerce’
  • Falcke v Gray; Ming vases were of ‘unusual beauty, rarity and distinction
  • Behnke v Bede; is the item of ‘peculiar value’ to C?
  • Lotus v Lamplough; increase in value can go towards the goods being rare and unique
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

how does the court determine if SP is appropriate for service contracts?

A
  • Verall v Great Yarmouth – must show the service is irreplaceable and damages would therefore be inadequate e.g. specialist/famous/unique designs/part completed already
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

how does supervision relate to SP and contracts for services?

A
  • Ryan - Constant supervision required?
  • Co-op v Argyll – unacceptable degree of supervision required? Sequence of contempt of courts?
  • Posner v Scott-Lewis
    o 1. Sufficient definition of what has to be done?
    o 2. Relative harm to both parties?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

How do contracts for personal services with contractors relate to SP

A
  • De Francesco v Barnum could it be akin to slavery to grant SP?
  • Ryan v Mutual Tontine - constant supervision required?
  • Giles v Morris could the purpose of the contract be defeated by deliberate poor performance? Equity will not act in vain.
  • Co-Op v Argyll many contempt proceedings needed?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

how does the court determine if SP is appropriate for sale or rental of land contracts?

A
  • Land is almost always unique so SP quite easy to get

- Verall v Great Yarmouth BC – available even for people who are renting

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what is the main drawback of SP?

A

only available at trial - slow

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

define an IMI

A

interim mandatory injunction

  • Order requiring the D to act in some way
  • Unlike SP available as a pre-trial remedy
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what is the test for IMIs

A
  • Shepherd Homes v Sandham: is there a ‘high degree of assurance’ that the remedy is rightly granted? ie is the case likely to win at court?
  • Locobail v Agroexpert – confirmed the ‘high degree of assurance’; no need for the American Cyanamid v Ethicon test
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

define an IPI

A

interim prohibitory injunction

- Order restraining the D from acting in some way

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what is the test for whether IPIs should be granted?

A

American Cyanamid v Ethicon
o 1) must be neither frivolous (trivial) nor vexatious (abuse of process/malicious); must be a serious matter
o 2) balance of convenience
o 3) Courts can consider additional factors too

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

give an example of a frivolous or trivial claim for IPIs

A

 Morning Star v Express Newspapers – Only a ‘moron in a hurry’ would confuse the papers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

how does the balance of convenience relate to whether the court grants an IPI?

A

 If IPI is wrongly refused, will damages be adequate for C? e.g. if the bike is sold on? Will D be able to pay adequate damages?
 If IPI is wrongly granted, will damages be adequate for D? e.g. if bike is prevented from being sold on? Will C be able to pay adequate damages?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

what additional factors will courts look to when deciding whether to grant an IPI?

A

 Default position is that the court will preserve the status quo ante Garden Cottage Foods v MMB
 What will be the effect on a party’s business if not granted? Potters Ballotini v WB
 Has there been significant investment by C or D? if so, courts may act to protect it Catnic v Stressline
 Fellows and Son v Fisher loss of employment can be considered
 Associated Newspapers v Insert Media ¬ loss of business goodwill can be considered

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

what is a search order?

A
  • Order to allow C access to D’s property for search and seizure
  • Damaging so high standard needed
  • Never given with notice
  • also to get back materials about to be published in breach of copyright (EMI v Pandit)
17
Q

what is the test for a search order?

A

Anton Piller v Manufacturing Processes

  • 1) extremely strong prima facie case
  • 2) serious damage to C
  • 3) evidence of D’s possession and risk of evidential destruction OR disposal by D – look for a ‘fly by night video pirate’ (Lock v Beswick) e.g. evidence of lying or intention to leave the country
18
Q

What is a freezing order?

A
  • Order preventing D dealing with his assets from Mareva v IB
  • Aims to stop a judgement against D being a ‘futile gesture’ Siskina v Distos Compania
  • Usually awarded before judgement without notice
19
Q

what is an asset for the purposes of a freezing order

A
  • Anything of value eg
  • Aeroplanes
  • Ships
20
Q

What case gives the test for whether the court will grant a freezing order?

A

Derby v Weldon

21
Q

what is the jurisdiction for freezing orders?

A
  • Can theoretically operate outside the jurisdiction but courts will not grant if “unduly oppressive” on D Re BCCI
  • And C must show D has insufficient assets within the jurisdiction Derby v Weldon
22
Q

what do courts usually demand before allowing a freezing order?

A
  • an undertaking; where C underwrites to a degree the losses D may suffer through the freezing order
23
Q

define an account of profits

A
  • Order requiring D to pay over unauthorised profits from a breach
    o Account for profits from breach of confidence AG v Guardian Newspapers (No 2)
24
Q

How does SP work against employees

A
  • No SP against employees s236 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
    o But statute does not apply to contractors
25
Q

Why was the contract in De Francesco v Barnum equivalent to slavery?

A

Contract for 7 years + could prevent employees marrying + could not enter into employment without hirer’s consent

26
Q

What are the defences to equitable remedies?

A
  • clean hands; C must have performed or be willing to perform his obligations Coatsworth v Johnson
  • delay defeats equity(but depends on circumstances); Eads v Williams,
  • unnecessary hardship to one part or third party; Patel v Ali
  • acquiescence; has C acted in a way that suggests he will not claim his rights, and has D consequently relied on that? Bulmer v Bollinger
27
Q

could a search order infringe HR?

A

no - Chappell v UK: legitimate aim and proportionate

28
Q

what is an injunction granted at trial called?

A

a final or perpetual injunction (Warner Bros v Nelson)

- need not last for ever - can just be for a period of time

29
Q

What is the rule about granting an injunction, its effect, and SP

A

injunction may not be granted - if it would have the same effect as specific performance
–Page One Records v Britton

30
Q

What case established freezing orders

A

Mareva v IB

31
Q

What is the test for whether the court will grant a freezing order?

A

Derby v Weldon
- 1) good arguable case (likely to win)?
- 2) are there relevant assets in the jurisdiction?
- 3) real risk of dissipation without one?
o Customs & Excise v Anchor Food - ‘real risk’ means ‘good arguable case’

32
Q

Explain the elements of the test for a freezing order

A

o ‘good arguable case’ = Ninemia v Trave a) capable of serious argument + b) not necessarily more than 50% chance of success

o Evidence of misappropriation suggests a sufficient risk of dissipation JSC Bank v Ablyazov- e.g. dishonesty or an intention to leave the country