RASHID MWALE V
Interim injunction was refused due to applicant's failure to estimate property value and specify care for assets, making injunction detrimental to respondent; however, security deposit was ordered as closure of respondent's business would likely render any CMA award unenforceable, causing irreparable loss to applicant.
Source excerpt
- Interim injunction
- Security for costs
- Enforcement of judgments
- Unfair termination
- Execution of awards