Injuctions Flashcards
what is an injunction
an order of the court requiring a person to refrain from doing, or to do, a particular act. e.g refrain them from trespassing, or pull down a building which obstructs the plaintiffs light. it is a form of equitable relief and so is a discretionary remedy.
Mandatory/ Compulsory?
an order directing performance of a positive act; asking someone to carry something out
prohibitory/ restrictive
an order prohibiting the continuance of a wrongful act.
Interim
a temporary injunction granted for a specified period of time (usually the next motions list) that is usually sought on an ex parte basis
Interlocutory injunction
a temporary injunction that stays in force until the final hearing of the action with its purpose being to preserve the status quo; (may start with an interim)
Perpetual injunction
a permanent injunction granted after the hearing of a trial of action;
Quia timet injunction
an injunction granted in circumstances where an applicant fears their rights will be breached, even though they have not yet been breached (pre-emptive).
an injunction that prohibits and actionable wrong that Is threatened, apprehended or imminent.
Quia timet - Redbland Bricks Ltd v Morris [1970] AC 652
circumstances required to obtain a Quia time injunction?
Outlined by Justice Meredith in Independent Newspapers v Irish Press [1932] IR 615
Classic test for Quia Timet Injunctions?
Attorney General (Boswell) v Rathmines and Pembroke Joint Hospital Board [1904] 1 IR 161
- Injunction sought to restrain the defendant from erecting a smallpox hospital on lands beside a village in county Dublin;
- Conflicting expert evidence existed as to the suitability of the selected site;
- Injunctive relief was refused.
“To sustain the injunction, the law requires proof by the plaintiff of a well-founded apprehension of injury—proof of actual and real danger—a strong probability, almost amounting to moral certainty”
Current law on quit timet I injunction set out in…
Szabo v Esat Digifone Ltd [1998] 2 ILRM 102
“proven substantial risk of danger”
principles in Szabo have been relied upon by
Ryanair Ltd v Aer Rianta cpt [2001] IEHC 229
Garrahy v Bord na gCon [2002] 3 IR 566
Quia Timet - Garrahy v Bord na gCon [2002] 3 IR 566
No difference in principles applied to interlocutory QT injunctions and any other kind of interlocutory injunction.But may be more difficult as a matter of evidence to establish that thereis a sufficient risk of future injury to justify the immediate grant of an injunction for interlocutory QT injunction
