An injunction is the law’s answer to a specific problem: by the time a normal case finishes, the damage will be done. The dismissal executed, the client list exploited, the wall built, the assets gone. Courts can move remarkably fast when the case for speed is made properly — and this page is the map of how: the gears the system runs through, the price of each, and the honest anatomy of an urgent application done right.
The Gears: Interim, Interlocutory, Ex Parte, Short Service
The system has gears matched to urgency. Ex parte — without notice — is the emergency gear, for cases where notice would defeat the purpose or time genuinely doesn’t exist; its price is the duty of full and frank disclosure: everything material goes before the court, including what hurts you, and material non-disclosure is a classic ground for later discharge. Short service is the workhorse: leave to serve on abridged notice, the other side heard within days. The interim order holds the line until the contested interlocutory hearing — whose outcome, in commercial reality, usually decides the dispute: most cases settle once the interlocutory position is set, which is why that application is prepared here as if everything turns on it. Quia timet relief reaches forward — restraining the wrong before it lands — on proof of genuine, imminent, substantial risk rather than speculation. And over every gear, one constant: delay is fatal — the court asked to act within hours asks first why you waited weeks, and the honest answer to “when should I call?” is: when you first thought of it.
What Decides These Applications — and What They Cost
The court’s framework is the interlocutory test — a fair question to be tried (a strong case, where the order sought is mandatory in substance), whether damages would adequately remedy the harm instead, and where the balance of convenience and justice lies — applied to evidence: the grounding affidavit, the exhibits, the chronology. Which is why the first hours here go into the record, not the rhetoric. The honest costs come in two forms: legal costs, discussed openly and in writing before commitment; and the undertaking as to damages — the near-universal price of interlocutory relief, your promise to compensate the other side if the injunction turns out to have been wrongly granted. Understanding it before applying is not caution; it’s competence. And the honest triage comes first of all: not every crisis needs an injunction — sometimes a strong letter, undertakings sought, or a different procedure serves faster and cheaper — and the first conversation’s job is telling you which, whichever chair you’re in: this practice defends these applications as well as bringing them.
Something Moving Right Now?
Phone rather than email - urgent calls taken, including out of hours. One conversation maps the realistic position before anything is committed.
Call 01 5827148