McKenna Breen Ltd v James [2001] EWCA Civ 1912 (29 November 2001)

McKenna Breen Ltd v James [2001] EWCA Civ 1912 (29 November 2001)

There was sufficient evidence before the court to justify maintaining the injunction until trial; no change of circumstances was established to warrant discharge, and the hearing before Gray J was fair and compliant with Article 6 ECHR.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1912
Parties
Claimant/respondent: McKenna Breen Ltd; Defendant/appellant: Kevin James
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Against Refusal to Discharge Interim Injunction
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Database Misuse, Compliance With Court Orders, Human Rights (article 6 Echr)
Civil Procedure Injunctions Data Protection Interim Injunctions Database Misuse Compliance With Court Orders Human Rights (article 6 Echr)

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

McKenna Breen Ltd

Claimant/respondent

Kevin James

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Against Refusal to Discharge Interim Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the interim injunction should be discharged due to alleged compliance by the defendant
  2. 2 Whether the hearing before Gray J was fair and compliant with Article 6 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in accepting the claimant's evidence and precluding arguments

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient evidence before the court to justify maintaining the injunction until trial; no change of circumstances was established to warrant discharge, and the hearing before Gray J was fair and compliant with Article 6 ECHR.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • No order for costs