Mannings Organisation Ltd & Anor v Manning [2026] EWHC 1160 (KB) (14 May 2026)

Mannings Organisation Ltd & Anor v Manning [2026] EWHC 1160 (KB) (14 May 2026)

There is a serious issue to be tried as to whether the Defendant's conduct amounts to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and whether the Claimants are entitled to injunctive relief. Damages are inadequate and the balance of convenience favours continuation of the injunction, subject to revision of its terms. The Defendant's application to discharge the injunction on grounds of procedural impropriety and non-disclosure fails; there was no deliberate exclusion or material non-disclosure by the Claimants' solicitors.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 1160 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Mannings Organisation Limited; Claimant: Mannings Amusements Limited; Defendant: Joseph Henry Manning
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application and Application to Discharge Injunction Under the Protection From Harassment Act 1997 / Return Date Hearing on Interim Injunction and Discharge Application
Outcome
Interim injunction continued in revised form; discharge application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Harassment, Protection From Harassment Act 1997, Corporate Litigation, Family Business Disputes
Civil Procedure Tort Law Company Law Interim Injunctions Harassment Protection From Harassment Act 1997 Corporate Litigation Family Business Disputes

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mannings Organisation Limited

Claimant

Mannings Amusements Limited

Claimant

Joseph Henry Manning

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application and Application to Discharge Injunction Under the Protection From Harassment Act 1997 / Return Date Hearing on Interim Injunction and Discharge Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimants are entitled to continuation of an interim injunction restraining the Defendant under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant's application to discharge the injunction should succeed on grounds of procedural impropriety and non-disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious issue to be tried as to whether the Defendant's conduct amounts to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and whether the Claimants are entitled to injunctive relief. Damages are inadequate and the balance of convenience favours continuation of the injunction, subject to revision of its terms. The Defendant's application to discharge the injunction on grounds of procedural impropriety and non-disclosure fails; there was no deliberate exclusion or material non-disclosure by the Claimants' solicitors.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction continued in revised form; discharge application dismissed.

Orders

  • Continuation of paragraph 3 of the injunction restraining the Defendant from operating a business at events where the Claimants have exclusive rights, subject to written notice and agreement.
  • Continuation of paragraph 4 of the injunction restraining the Defendant from threatening, intimidating, or inflicting physical violence on the Claimants' directors, employees, customers, or sub-contractors, or interfering with or destroying the Claimants' property, with revised wording.