28 Oct 2016
WU RONG ZHAO v. CLARISSA OR AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- WU RONG ZHAO v. CLARISSA OR AND ANOTHER
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA2556/2016
The ex parte injunction was discharged because the plaintiff had no proprietary interest in the company’s property, the applicant was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice, the plaintiff by demanding return of deposits had treated the provisional agreement as ended (leaving damages as the adequate remedy), and there was material non-disclosure in the ex parte application; accordingly the balance of convenience did not favour continuing the injunction.