AB v CD (Rev 2)

AB v CD (Rev 2)

The court refused the interim injunction because damages, even if limited by Clause 11.4, were deemed an adequate remedy in light of the parties' commercial expectations and the freely negotiated contract. The existence of a limitation clause does not render damages inadequate for the purposes of interim relief.

Parties
Claimant: AB; Defendant: CD
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Related Injunction Application / Ruling on Interim Injunction Application
Outcome
Application for interim injunction refused
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Contract Termination, Limitation of Liability, Adequacy of Damages
Commercial Law Arbitration Law Interim Injunctions Contract Termination Limitation of Liability Adequacy of Damages

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AB

Claimant

CD

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Related Injunction Application / Ruling on Interim Injunction Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim injunction should be granted to restrain termination of a Licensing Agreement pending arbitration
  2. 2 Whether damages are an adequate remedy given contractual limitation clauses

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the interim injunction because damages, even if limited by Clause 11.4, were deemed an adequate remedy in light of the parties' commercial expectations and the freely negotiated contract. The existence of a limitation clause does not render damages inadequate for the purposes of interim relief.

Court Disposition

Application for interim injunction refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Judgment anonymised for publication