“PLEADINGS AND EVIDENCE SERVE QUITE DIFFERENT PURPOSES”: THE NEED FOR CLAIMANTS TO PLEAD THEIR CASE WHEN APPLYING FOR AN INJUNCTION
We are looking at a case that deals with two issues: (i) the practice of seeking an injunction without having first issued proceedings; (ii) the desirability of a party seeking an injunction to put a fully pleaded case before the…
ISSUING AN INJUNCTION MEANS “PROCEEDINGS” ARE UNDERWAY AND THE CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY THE COSTS AFTER IT WAS SET ASIDE: ALLOWING THE CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENTS IN THIS APPEAL WOULD BE AN “AFFRONT TO COMMONSENSE”
Here we look at an ingenious argument about the meaning of “proceedings” and the costs consequences if a claimant has an injunction order set aside. The claimant argued that the nature of the action he pursued did not amount to…
APPLICANTS FOR INJUNCTIONS: WHY ARE YOU ASKING FOR AN INJUNCTION BUT NOT ISSUING PROCEEDINGS BEFOREHAND? THAT PRACTICE SHOULD STOP: HIGH COURT DECISION
Here we are looking at the (to my mind somewhat risky) practice of applying for and obtaining an injunction, without actually issuing proceedings. This judgment is a reminder that this should only happen in exceptional circumstances. (This was an injunction…
A COURT ORDER SO AMBIGUOUS THAT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO ENFORCE : SOME ESSENTIAL POINTS ABOUT DRAFTING HERE
Here we are looking at a Court of Appeal decision about the drafting and construction of court orders. The order made in this case was totally deficient, consequently it could not be enforced. (Absolute precision is demanded here…) “……
PROVING THINGS 264: CLAIMANTS FAIL TO PROVE THAT THEY ARE ENTITLED TO AN INJUNCTION: “THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE CLAIMANTS DOES NOT COME CLOSE TO DEMONSTRATING A COMPELLING JUSTIFICATION FOR THE ORDER”
We are looking at a case where there was clear example of a failure to prove things. The claimants did not have sufficient evidence to satisfy the court it should make the order they were seeking. In fact the judgment…
SERVICE OF INJUNCTIONS: THE COURT ALLOWS SERVICE BY EMAIL RATHER THAN PERSONAL SERVICE
Injunctions normally have to be served in person. Here we are looking at a short point as to when it is permissible to serve an injunction by email. THE CASE Chanel Ltd v Skeens [2025] EWHC 619 (KB)…
THE NEED FOR THE UTMOST CARE WHEN SEEKING INJUNCTIONS WITH SPEED: AN ENQUIRY AS TO DAMAGES ORDERED BECAUSE OF ERRORS MADE IN THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THE JUDGE
The judgment of HHJ Halliwell, sitting as a High Court Judge, in Bootle v GHL Property Management and Development Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 317 (Ch) provides an object lesson on the dangers of over-hasty applications for an injunction. It…
THERE WAS NO GOOD REASON FOR AN INJUNCTION APPLICATION TO BE HEARD IN PRIVATE OR AN ANONYMITY ORDER GRANTED
In Pump Court Chambers Ltd v Brown (aka Goodfield) [2024] EWHC 2428 (Ch) Charles Morrison (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) refused an application that an injunction hearing take place in private and the parties have anonymity. “Is…
AN APPLICATION FOR COMMITTAL THAT WAS “WHOLLY FRIVOLOUS” AND “BORDERS ON VEXATIOUS”: CLAIMANT NOW REQUIRES PERMISSION TO BRING SIMILAR COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS…
For the second time today I am writing about an injunction case which failed because the claimant had failed to prove compliance with an order for service. However this particular case has more sinister overtones. The claimant attempted to bring…
AN INJUNCTION MUST BE SERVED PERSONALLY: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS DO NOT GET OFF THE STARTING LINE
In MBR Acres td & Ors v Maher & Anor [2022] EWHC 1123 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin held that the obligation to serve an injunction personally had not been altered by the new CPR Part 81. Sending copies of the…
DELAY IN PURSUING PROCEEDINGS IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: LOCAL AUTHORITY’S INSOUCIENCE A CAUSE FOR CONCERN
In London Borough of Havering & Ors v Persons Unknown & Ors [2021] EWHC 2648 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin had some clear warnings to give in relation to cases where local authorities had failed to pursue cases promptly after obtaining…
SERVING PROCEEDINGS ON “PERSONS UNKNOWN”: AN ONGOING ISSUE – WITH NO EASY ANSWER
In the course of his judgment in The London Borough of Hackney v Grant& Ors [2021] EWHC 2548 (QB) Mr Justice Lavender considered the issue of service on persons unknown. WEBINAR ON SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM On the 24th…
THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE AND CPR CANNOT BE USED TO OVERRIDE THE REQUIREMENT THAT CASES BE DEALT WITH “JUSTLY”: HIGH COURT DECISION
The judgment of Mr Justice Lane in Ibrahim v London Borough of Haringey & Anor [2021] EWHC 731 shows an unsuccessful attempt to argue that the “overriding objective” justified a preliminary finding made after the court did not hear evidence….
SENSIBLE COVID PRECAUTIONS TAKEN WHEN IMPLEMENTING A SEARCH ORDER: APPLICANT TAKES A VERY NUANCED APPROACH
The judgment of Mr Justice Fordham in Calor Gas Ltd v Chorley Bottle Gas Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2426 (QB) has some interesting observations about the way in which COVID affects both the way a hearing is held and…
THE USEFULNESS OF HAVING A TRANSCRIPT WHEN CONSIDERING ALLEGATIONS OF NON-DISCLOSURE
In Les Ambassadeurs Club Ltd v Albluewi (aka Sheikh Salah Hamdan Albluewi And Mr Salah Hamdan Albelwi) [2020] EWHC 1313 (QB)Mr Justice Freedman set out the importance of having a transcript of an ex-parte hearing when considering allegations of a…
APPLICATIONS TO THE COURT AND THE DUTY OF CANDOUR: THE JUDGE MUST SEE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE ADVERSE TO YOUR CASE
In Short & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Police Misconduct Tribunal & Anor [2020] EWHC 385 (Admin) Mr Justice Saini issued a warning about the duty of candour owed to the court, particularly on a without notice application….
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: FAILURE TO SERVE ANY DEFENDANTS WHEN APPLYING FOR AN INJUNCTION: THE GOOSE IS NOT PROPERLY COOKED…
In Canada Goose UK Retail Ltd v Persons Unknown & Anor [2019] EWHC 2459 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin refused the claimants’ application for an injunction on several grounds. Here we look at the issues relating to service of the claim…
THINKING OF MAKING AN APPLICATION FOR A WITHOUT NOTICE INJUNCTION? BEST READ THIS JUDGMENT
Any public body, indeed anyone, considering making an application for a without notice injunction is best advised to read the judgment of Mr Justice Warby in Birmingham City Council v Afsar & Ors [2019] EWHC 1560 (QB). “Urgency can…
WITHOUT NOTICE INJUNCTIONS 1: CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN INJUNCTION GOES DOWN THE PAN
The judgment in Brothers Enterprises Ltd v New World Hospitality UK Ltd [2017] EWHC 2455 (Ch) has only recently arrived on BAILLI. However it is a case that shows the importance of disclosure in relation to without notice injunctions. What…
SERVICE OF CLAIM FORM BY EMAIL ALLOWED: THE SAFEGUARDS TO RESPONDENTS TO WITHOUT NOTICE APPLICATIONS.
The case and issues in Linklaters LLP -v- Mellish [2019] EWHC 177 (QB) have already made the headlines. The procedural aspects of the decision are also of interest. Firstly Mr Justice Warby made an order allowing service of the claim form…
PROVING THINGS 127: WRITTEN CONTRACT – WHAT WRITTEN CONTRACT? APPLICATION FOR AN INJUNCTION FAILS WHEN CLAIMANT CANNOT PROVE A CONTRACT WAS EVER SIGNED
The judgment of HHJ Neil Bidder QC in Tenon FM Ltd v Cawley & Ors [2018] EWHC 1972 (QB) shows a failure by a claimant to prove the most basic of issues. The claimant could not establish that a defendant had…
PROVING THINGS 124: “PUT BLUNTLY: THAT EVIDENCE IS WHOLLY INADEQUATE”: DEFENDANT’S EVIDENCE ON AN INJUNCTION APPLICATION
In Jahangiri v St. George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 2278 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin observed that witness evidence put forward by the defendant was far from adequate. “The Court is best assisted when the evidence of someone who…
PROVING THINGS 88: MATTERS YOU HAVE TO PROVE IF YOU WANT AN INJUNCTION: THE IMPACT OF A SIX MONTH DELAY IN APPLYING
In Blade Motor Group Ltd v Reynolds & Reynolds Ltd [2018] EWHC 497 (Ch) an applicant for an injunction failed because it failed to prove the basic requirements. The fact that there was a six-month delay in applying for the injunction…
LAST REMINDER OF NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTION FOR 2017: WITHOUT NOTICE APPLICATIONS ARE SO, SO, DANGEROUS: THE DUTY OF FULL DISCLOSURE EXTENDS TO WEAKNESSES IN YOUR OWN CASE
The one New Year’s Resolution I recommended to litigators for 2017 was to be very, very, wary of without notice applications. As we get near to the end of the year this advice is borne out by the judgment of…
PROVING THINGS 75: PROVING CAUSATION ON AN UNDERTAKING TO PAY DAMAGES: THE INJUNCTION THAT COST THE APPLICANT TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS: ROUND 2
We have looked before at the decision in Fiona Trust & Holding Corporation -v- Yuri Privalov & others [2016]. An applicant for a freezing order was found to have obtained the order wrongly. Consequently they were ordered to pay damages that stretched…
LATE SERVICE OF APPLICATIONS, INACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES AND THE PRESUMPTIONS THE JUDGE SHOULD DRAW
In Capita PLC -v- Darch [2017] EWHC 1248 (Ch) Richard Spearman QC highlighted some of the procedural issues that can arise when applications are served late and with insufficient time estimates. A failure to serve promptly did not, ultimately,…
A NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTION FOR 2017 : EX PARTE APPLICATIONS ARE NO PARTY (AND CAN LEAD TO CRYING)
Last year I had 10 new year’s resolutions for litigators. This year I have one. (The resolutions from last year remain current but one resolution is easier to keep) THINK VERY CAREFULLY BEFORE, DURING AND AFTER, MAKING AN EX-PARTE APPLICATION…
OBTAIN AN INJUNCTION: PAY TENS OF MILLIONS IN COMPENSATION: ANOTHER WARNING LESSON
This blog has looked several times at the dangers of obtaining injunctions. A particular danger is the undertaking in damages that has to be given when obtaining an injunction to freeze assets. The judgment of Mr Justice Males in Fiona…
SERVICE BY E-MAIL: ALLOWED BY THE HIGH COURT SO THAT INJUNCTION COULD BE EFFECTIVE
In JPH -v- XYZ [2015] EWHC (a decision made this Saturday!) Mr Justice Popplewell made an order allowing service by e-mail. THE CASE The claimant was bringing an injunction to prevent “revenge porn”. An application was made without notice to…
COSTS, INDEMNITY COSTS AND CONDUCT WHEN CONSIDERING COSTS FOLLOWING AN ORDER FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION AT AN INTERLOCUTORY STAGE
In JSC Mezhdumarodiniy Promyshlenniy Bank -v- Pugachev [2015] EWHC 1694 (Ch) Mr Justice Hildyard considered the issue of whether a respondent to an order for cross-examination should be ordered to pay the costs of that application and whether those costs…
GET AN INJUNCTION – PAY £27 MILLION IN DAMAGES: A POINT WORTH REMEMBERING
The judgment in AstraZeneca AB -v- KRKA dd Novo Mesto [2015] EWCA Civ 484 is one that should be read by anyone thinking of applying for an injunction and giving an undertaking in damages. The claimant obtained an injunction and…
WHY YOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS SHOULD BE MADE IN CHELSEA: MAKING FIRST HAND STATEMENTS AVOIDS PENALTIES
The post earlier this week in relation to the need for full disclosure on without notice injunctions also highlighted the need for first hand evidence. There are real dangers when a solicitor signs a witness statement. That principle was highlighted…
FOOTBALL, SEX, INJUNCTIONS AND MATERIAL NON-DISCLOSURE: BE CAREFUL NOT TO GET ON THE JUDGE'S OFFSIDE
In YXB -v- TNO Mr Justice Warby set out the importance of full and frank disclosure on parties making an application for an ex-parte injunction. It also reiterates the importance of claimants giving direct evidence whenever possible and the dangers…
SOLICITOR FOUND TO HAVE DELIBERATELY MISLED THE COURT: BOREH -v- DJIBOUTI
In Boreh -v- Republic of Djibouti [2015] EWHC 769 (Comm) Mr Justice Flaux made a clear and unequivocal finding that a solicitor had deliberately misled the court. This led to the setting aside of the injunction that the clients had…
MATERIAL NON-DISCLOSURE ON WITHOUT NOTICE APPLICATIONS: A SALUTARY REMINDER
The previous post on the Evans’ case highlights the duty of full and frank disclosure on an ex parte application. In the Evans case it would have been impossible for the claimant to argue material non-disclosure (if indeed there was…
WITHOUT NOTICE APPLICATIONS FOR FREEZING ORDERS: THE DANGERS ABOUND: GREENWICH CASES CONTAINS SOME TIMELY LESSONS
I have written before of the dangers involved in making without notice applications, particularly for freezing orders (“nuclear weapons that can blow up in your face”). There is an extremely high duty on the applicant to disclose all relevant matters…
You must be logged in to post a comment.