Behbehani v Salem: CA 1989

It was undesirable to apply hard and fast rules when considering the replacement of an interim injunction obtained wrongfully (even if the nondisclosure was based on legal advice) by a full injunction. Woolf LJ said however that: ‘In deciding in a case where there has undoubtedly been non-disclosure whether or not there should be a discharge of an existing injunction and a re-grant of fresh injunctions, it is most important that the Court assesses the degree and extent of the culpability with regard to the non-disclosure, and the importance and significance to the outcome of the application for an injunction of the matters which were not disclosed to the Court.’
Nourse LJ said that one test as to the innocence of the failings was whether the mistakes were errors of judgment.

Judges:

Woolf LJ, Nourse LJ

Citations:

[1989] 1 WLR 723, [1989] 2 All ER 143

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFranses v Al Assad and others ChD 26-Oct-2007
The claimant had obtained a freezing order over the proceeds of sale of a property held by solicitors. The claimant was liquidator of a company, and an allegation of wrongful trading had been made against the sole director and defendant. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.260078