Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Jersey decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Royal Court dismissed a shareholder application for interim injunctions in an unfair prejudice dispute, holding damages and final relief would be adequate.
Cornish v Brelade Bay Limited [2019] JRC 091 (21 May 2019)
The Royal Court of Jersey refused a freezing injunction and disclosure orders, finding no sufficient evidence of a real risk that the developer would dissipate assets.
Holmes -v- Lingard HJL Holdings Ltd and Angel Fish Ltd [2015] JRC 141 (29 June 2015)
The Royal Court discharged ex parte interim injunctions because they were obtained without notice and on inadequate disclosure, then refused to re-impose them.
JT -v- JCRA [2013] JRC 159 (06 August 2013)
The Jersey Royal Court granted JT a delay pending appeal against a licence modification requiring wholesale line rental, holding the balance of convenience favoured delay.
JPMO v States and JPEMB [2002] JRC 140 (22 July 2002)
The Jersey Royal Court refused to lift a stay on the Jersey Potato Marketing Scheme, finding the balance of convenience favoured keeping the scheme on hold pending EC law issues.
Milner v Milner Laboratories [2000] JRC 145A (24 July 2000)
The court set aside ex parte interim injunctions for lack of urgency and risk, then re-imposed narrower restraints by consent subject to a cross-undertaking in damages.
1998/93 - Dollar Land (Manhattan) Ltd v Channel Hotels & Properties Ltd [1998] UR 93 (1 May 1998)
The court discharged an ex parte injunction after finding no enforceable contract, inadequate disclosure, and that damages would have been an adequate remedy.
Wilkins v Headrick [1996] JLR_Note 14a (23 August 1996)
Interlocutory Mareva injunction case holding that legitimate defendant expenses may be allowed where the balance of convenience justifies it.
Alpha Print v Alphagraphics [1989] JLR 152 (06 April 1989)
The court considered discharge of an interlocutory injunction and held it should not be discharged where there is a serious issue to be tried, inadequate damages, and the balance of convenience favours it.
Cerqueira v Bilbao Intl. Bank Ltd. [1981] JLR 141 (17 November 1981)
The court granted an interlocutory injunction to preserve the status quo, finding a substantial question to be tried and that the balance of convenience favoured relief.
Explore more
