Mercury Engineering & Ors -v- Mc Cool Controls and Engineering Ltd & Ors [2011] IEHC 425 (19 July 2011)

Mercury Engineering & Ors -v- Mc Cool Controls and Engineering Ltd & Ors [2011] IEHC 425 (19 July 2011)

The court refused the interlocutory injunction because the defendants' affidavits and evidence went beyond a bare assertion of justification and raised triable issues of fact and opinion. The court was not satisfied that the plaintiffs had established a clear case that the statements were untrue or that the defendants' justification defence was bound to fail. The balance of convenience and the importance of freedom of expression weighed against granting prior restraint in the circumstances.

Citation
[2011] IEHC 425
Parties
Plaintiffs: Mercury Engineering, Michael Kennedy and Francis Matthews; Defendants: McCool Controls and Engineering Limited, Eugene McCool (otherwise Finn), M and G. Ventilation and Air Conditioning Limited, Sandyford Ventilation Limited, Barry Clarke trading as Clarke Electrical, D. M. I. A. C. Engineering Limited, Gerry McCool trading as D. M. C. Electrical Services, Temple Mechanical Contractors Limited (in liquidation), Glenmore Electrical Services Limited, S. & S. Electrical Limited (voluntary liquidation)
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
19 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Plenary Proceedings (high Court) / Application for Interlocutory Injunction
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction refused
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Defamation—libel, Freedom of Expression, Justification Defence, Interference With Contractual Relations, Conspiracy to Injure, Arbitration Clauses
Defamation Contract Commercial Law Interlocutory Injunctions Defamation—libel Freedom of Expression Justification Defence Interference With Contractual Relations +2 more

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mercury Engineering, Michael Kennedy and Francis Matthews

Plaintiffs

McCool Controls and Engineering Limited, Eugene McCool (otherwise Finn), M and G. Ventilation and Air Conditioning Limited, Sandyford Ventilation Limited, Barry Clarke trading as Clarke Electrical, D. M. I. A. C. Engineering Limited, Gerry McCool trading as D. M. C. Electrical Services, Temple Mechanical Contractors Limited (in liquidation), Glenmore Electrical Services Limited, S. & S. Electrical Limited (voluntary liquidation)

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application in Plenary Proceedings (high Court) / Application for Interlocutory Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from publishing allegedly defamatory statements and/or interfering with business relations pending trial
  2. 2 Whether the defendants' pleaded defence of justification is sufficient to resist interlocutory relief
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience and adequacy of damages favour the grant of an injunction

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the interlocutory injunction because the defendants' affidavits and evidence went beyond a bare assertion of justification and raised triable issues of fact and opinion. The court was not satisfied that the plaintiffs had established a clear case that the statements were untrue or that the defendants' justification defence was bound to fail. The balance of convenience and the importance of freedom of expression weighed against granting prior restraint in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction refused

Orders

  • Plaintiffs' application for interlocutory injunction is refused.