1 / 9

The Nuclear Weapons of the Law

Injunctions? What are they?. Problematic Common LawEquitable RemedyClean handsFinal or InterimDifferent types: (a) mandatory; (b) prohibitory; (c) interlocutory; (d) quia timet; and (e)

spencer
Download Presentation

The Nuclear Weapons of the Law

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. The Nuclear Weapons of the Law Frederico Singarajah Barrister 1 Gray�s Inn Square

    2. Injunctions? What are they? Problematic Common Law Equitable Remedy Clean hands Final or Interim Different types: (a) mandatory; (b) prohibitory; (c) interlocutory; (d) quia timet; and (e) �super� injuctions

    3. General Principles Court�s powers: s37 Supreme Courts Act 1981; and s38 County Courts Act 1984 Legal requirements: Locus standi Discretionary Inadequacy of Damages

    4. American Cyanimid Co -v- Ethicon Ltd [1975] AC 396 Requirements: Serious question to be tried; Inadequacy of damages; Balance of convenience; Any other special factors Procedure: Part 23 Application notice Issued claim Witness statement

    5. The Nuclear Weapons Freezing (Mareva) injunction - Mareva Compania Naviera SA -v- International Bulk Carriers SA (The Mareva) [1980] 1 All E.R. 213 Search and Seizure (Anton Piller) injunction - Anton Piller KG -v- Manufacturing Processes Ltd [1976] 1 All E.R. 779

    6. Mareva Compania Naviera SA -v- International Bulk Carriers SA (The Mareva) [1980] 1 All E.R. 21 Requirements: Good arguable case Real risk of dissipation of assets Other characteristics: Duty to disclose assets Right not to self-incriminate Third parties

    7. Anton Piller KG -v- Manufacturing Processes Ltd [1976] 1 All E.R. 779 s7 Civil Procedure Act 1997 Requirements: Suffer serious harm and injustice Other characteristics: Supervising solicitor Prohibited disclosure by Respondent Disposition of seized assets

    8. Procedural Documents Application Part 23 & 25 of Civil Procedure Rules; Issued Claim Affidavit - full and frank disclosure Draft orders @ PD 25 of CPR Penal notice Undertakings Applicant Solicitor Costs Lapse

    9. Bank Mellat -v- Nikpour [1985] F.S.R. 87 �The rule requiring full disclosure seems to me to be one of the most fundamental importance, particularly in the context of the draconian remedy of the Mareva injunction. It is in effect, together with the Anton Piller order, one of the law's two �nuclear� weapons. If access to such a weapon is obtained without the fullest and frankest disclosure, I have no doubt at all that it should be revoked.� Lord Denning, Master of the Rolls

More Related