Practice

Interim injunction freedom of expression threshold test for grant of orderImutran Ltd v Uncaged Campaigns Ltd and Another: ChD (Sir Andrew Morritt V-C): 11 January 2001The claimant applied for an injunction until trial or further order restraining the defendants from misusing confidential information of the claimant or from infringing its copyright.The defendants contended that as the interim injunction affected the exercise of the right to freedom of expression, section 12 of the Human Rights Act 1998 applied.

Section 12, in the defendants submission, introduced a higher threshold test for the grant of an interim injunction than that previously applied by the court.Mark Warby (instructed by Eversheds) for the claimant.

David Bean QC (instructed by Simons Muirhead & Burton) for the defendants.

Michael Tugendhat QC for the RSPCA as interveners.Held, granting the injunction, that under American Cyanimid Co v Ethicon Ltd [1975] AC 396 an applicant for an interim injunction had to show a real prospect of succeeding in his claim to a permanent injunction at trial, whereas the test under section 12(3) was that the applicant was likely to establish that the publication should not be allowed; that as a matter of language, likelihood was slightly higher in the scale of probability than a real prospect of success; that the difference between the two was so small that there would not be many cases that would have succeeded under the old test but failed under the new; that in the circumstances the claimant should be granted the injunction sought.