CORAM
COKER JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
FATAYI- WILLIAMS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SOWEMIMO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
ADIATU LADUNNI APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant contended that the respondent had not made out a strong prima facie case entitling him to the order of injunction granted by the trial judge.
HELD
The Court held that the respondent had made out a case for interim injunction and the learned trial judge came to the right conclusion that this was a case in which he ought to grant interim injunction.
ISSUES
Whether the case made out by the respondent and the evidences before the Court were enough to entitle the respondent to an order for interim injunction and the Court to make the order granting interim injunction.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
PRINCIPLE OF INTERIM INJUNCTION
“The principle seems to be clear, an interim injunction would be granted to a party who shows he has a prima facie case on a claim of right and the case he has made out is one which the opposing party would be called upon to answer and that it is just and convenient for the Court to intervene”.
PER G.B.A COKER JSC
CASES CITED
CHIEF YESUFU A. ONIRU V. WAHABI GBADAMOSI SC 328/69 (Decided on the 23rd of December, 1971).
DONMAR PRODUCTIONS LTD. V. BARY & ORS (1967) I WLR 740 AT 742
JOHN HOLT (NIG). LTD. & ANOR V. HOLTS AFRICAN WORKERS UNION OF NIGERIA AND CAMEROON (1963) I ALL NLR 379
REPUBLIC OF PERU V. DREYFUS BROS V. CO. (1888) 38 Ch. D 348 at 362
STATUTES REFERRED TO