It is the duty of a plaintiff who has obtained an interlocutory injunction to proceed to trial and not simply to sit back and rely upon the injunction until such time as the defendant moves to discharge it. The court have stressed the importance of prompt progress to trial in a case where a claimant has had the distinct benefit of freezing orders or search and seizure orders.
Judges:
Lord Justice Glidewell, Lord Justice Dillon
Citations:
[1988] 1 WLR 1337
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Derrick Burgess, Chris Furbert, Sinclair Smith and Orin Simmons v Stevedoring Services Limited PC 15-Jul-2002
PC (Bermuda) An injunction had been granted requiring the trade union to cease industrial action. The action was settled, but the injunction was not released. Later, there were furthe rdisputes, and committal was . .
Cited – Ministry of Defence v Foxley and others Admn 10-Dec-2007
In 1992, the claimant and members of his family were made subject to restraint orders after his conviction for corruption. They now applied for discharge of the orders claiming excessive delay. Nothing had moved forward since 1996, saying hey had in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.187525