Procedures And Rememdies

Question 1

Mayne Pharma v Teva UK

Answer 1

Claimants brought interim injunction against Teva for patent infringement. The courts held that the claimants had failed to establish that there was a real risk of damage which justified immediate intervention by the court and refused them an interim injunction.

Question 2

South Buckinghamshire District Council v Porter

Answer 2

Gypsy case.
Courts discretion absolute.
Injunctive relief unlikely unless considered proportionate.
This protects public interest and private interests eg human rights.

Question 3

The Siskina

Answer 3

Court cannot grant interlocutory relief when substantive proceedings are taking place abroad.
Courts have no jurisdiction to grant freezing injunction when there was no claim for substantive relief before English courts.

Question 4

American Cyanamid v Ethicon

Answer 4

Guidelines for granting interlocutory injunction:
Claimant has strong case?
Are damages an adequate remedy? 
Balance of convenience?
Maintain status quo?

Question 5

Araci v Fallon

Answer 5

When American Cyanamid doesn’t apply:
When defendant is proposing to act in clear breach of negative covenant there must be special circumstances for court to refuse injunction. Granting injunction here was unduly oppressive. Damages were adequate.

Question 6

Series 5 Software v Clarke

Answer 6

Takes into account Cyanamid principles and also how strong both cases are based on credible evidence when granting remedies.

Question 7

Mareva Compania Naiera v International Bulkcarriers.

Answer 7

Order was sought to prevent defendant dispersing his assets.
Court granted ad personam order. Injunction may be given if it appears to the court to be just or convenient. Order could be made even though it dealt with assets in which the claimant had no direct right.

Question 8

Anton Piller KG v Manufacturing Processes.

Answer 8

A search order which orders the defendant to give permission for their property to be search or be held in contempt of court. Only used exceptionally:
When there is an extremely strong case against defendant.
Damage/potential damage is very serious.
Clear evidence that there is a strong chance that evidence will be destroyed.