SGS 9 - Interim Injunctions

Question 1

American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd [1975]

Answer 1

Laid down guidelines on whether a court should grant an interim prohibitory injunction.

Lord Diplock stated his guidelines in a threefold ‘test’, as follows:-
1. Is there a serious question to be tried?

If the answer to that question is “yes”, then there are two further related questions to answer which are:

2. Would damages be an adequate remedy for a party injured by the court’s grant of, or failure to grant, an injunction?
3. If not, where does the “balance of convenience” lie?

Question 2

Cinpres Gas Injection v Melea [2005]

Answer 2

The court held that the more serious the nature of the injunction applied for, the more desirable it was that notice was given to the respondent to the application.

Question 3

Memory Corporation plc v Sidhu [2000]

Answer 3

In making a ‘without notice application’ the applicant is under a duty to make full, fair and accurate disclosure of material information to the court and to draw the court’s attention to “significant factual, legal and procedural aspects of the case”.

Question 4

Kazakhstan Kagazy plc v Arip [2014]

Answer 4

Stated that the applicant does not have to rehearse a detailed analysis of possible inferences that the respondent might seek to rely on.

Question 5

Sita UK Group Holdings Ltd and another v Serruys and

others [2010]

Answer 5

The court allowed an injunction to continue despite a material and deliberate non-disclosure because the claimants had a good arguable case for the injunction.

Question 6

Attorney General v Times Newspapers Ltd [1992]

Answer 6

If a third party knows of the order and breaches it, this can also amount to contempt of court.

Question 7

What is a freezing injunction?

Answer 7

A freezing injunction (formerly known as a Mareva injunction) is an interim order restraining a party from removing assets located within the jurisdiction out of the jurisdiction, or from dealing with assets whether they are located within the jurisdiction or not.

Question 8

What are the effects of a freezing injuction?

Answer 8

1. All assets mentioned in the order are frozen.
2. The respondent (or anyone else with notice of the order) will be in contempt of court if it breaches its terms.
3. The applicant is obliged to press ahead with the action.

Question 9

What specific requirement are there that apply to freezing injunctions?

Answer 9

1. A substantive cause of action justiciable in England and Wales.
2. A good arguable case.
3. The respondent has assets within the jurisdiction.
4. There is a real risk that the respondent may remove from the jurisdiction, dispose of, dissipate or hide his assets in any way that will hinder enforcement of any judgment the applicant may obtain.