Khorasandjian v Bush [1993] EWCA Civ 18 (16 February 1993)

Khorasandjian v Bush [1993] EWCA Civ 18 (16 February 1993)

The court held that the injunction restraining the defendant from using violence, harassing, pestering, or communicating with the plaintiff was justified in law as an interlocutory injunction, as the cumulative conduct posed a real risk of harm to the plaintiff's health and amounted to actionable wrongs. The choice of wording was within the judge's discretion and sufficiently clear for enforcement.

Citation
[1993] EWCA Civ 18
Parties
Respondent (plaintiff): Claire Elliott Khorasandjian; Appellant (defendant): Garry Alan Bush
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 February 1993
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutory Injunction Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Harassment, Private Nuisance, Assault, Molestation, Interlocutory Relief
Tort Law Civil Procedure Injunctions Harassment Private Nuisance Assault Molestation Interlocutory Relief

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claire Elliott Khorasandjian

Respondent (plaintiff)

Garry Alan Bush

Appellant (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutory Injunction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court had jurisdiction to grant an interlocutory injunction restraining harassment, pestering, or communication where the conduct did not fall within a recognised tort or actionable wrong.
  2. 2 Whether the wording of the injunction was appropriate and enforceable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the injunction restraining the defendant from using violence, harassing, pestering, or communicating with the plaintiff was justified in law as an interlocutory injunction, as the cumulative conduct posed a real risk of harm to the plaintiff's health and amounted to actionable wrongs. The choice of wording was within the judge's discretion and sufficiently clear for enforcement.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The interlocutory injunction restraining the defendant from using violence, harassing, pestering, or communicating with the plaintiff remains in force.
  • Costs not to be enforced without leave of the court.