Interlocutory Injunctions

Question 1

American Cyanamid

Answer 1

1) A serious question to be tried.
2) Balance of convenience.
3) Other special considerations.
4) A real prospect of trial.

Question 2

Series 5 Software v Clarke

Answer 2

1) Grant a matter of discretion and depends on facts of case.
2) No fixed rules when to grant. Relief must be flexible.
3) Court should rarely attempt to resolve complex issues of law or fact.

4) Other major factors:
a) Extent to which damages would be adequate.
b) Balance of convenience.
c) The maintenance of status quo.
d) Any clear view reached as to strengths and weaknesses of parties’ cases.

Question 3

Quick Draw v Global Live Events [2012]

Answer 3

Series 5 Software v Clarke principles were applied.

Question 4

Mareva Compania Naviera

Answer 4

1) There must be a case that claimant will obtain judgment for damages in court proceeding.
2) Must be a real risk of danger defendant will takes steps to make sure assets unavailable or traceable when judgment is given.
3) Must be assets to preserve. Available against both movable and immovable property.

Question 5

Anton Piller v Manufacturing Processes

Answer 5

1) An extremely strong prima facie case. Higher standard than that for other interlocutory injunctions following Cyanamid.
2) Serious potential damage.
3) Real possibility evidence will be destroyed.
4) No real harm to the defendant.

Question 6

Rank Film Distributors v Video Information Center

Answer 6

Followed Anton Piller.