North London Railway Co v The Great Northern Railway Co: CA 9 Jun 1883

The Judicature Act, 1873, s. 25, sub-S. 8, has given no power to the High Court to issue an injunction in a case in which no Court before that Act had power to give any remedy whatever.
Therefore the High Court has no jurisdiction to issue an injunction to restrain a party from proceeding with an arbitration in a matter beyond the agreement to refer, although such arbitration proceeding may be futile and vexatious- Semble, per Brett, LJ, that the Judicature Act, 1873, has dealt only with procedure, and not with jurisdiction at all, and that if no Court had power to issue an injunction before that Act, the High Court has no such power now.


Cotton LJ


(1883) 11 QBD 30, [1883] UKLawRpKQB 111


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedSiskina (owners of Cargo lately on Board) v Distos Compania Naviera SA HL 1979
An injunction was sought against a Panamanian ship-owning company to restrain it from disposing of a fund, consisting of insurance proceeds, in England. The claimant for the injunction was suing the company in a Cyprus court for damages and believed . .
CitedFourie v Le Roux and others HL 24-Jan-2007
The appellant, liquidator of two South African companies, had made a successful without notice application for an asset freezing order. He believed that the defendants had stripped the companies of substantial assets. The order was set aside for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Arbitration

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.248208