LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Injunctions – Serious Question to Be Tried
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
An application for an interlocutory injunction must satisfy the court that there is a serious question to be tried in addition to satisfying the court that they have a right which ought to be protected.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"An application for an interlocutory injunction must satisfy the court, if he is to succeed, that there is a serious question to be tried in addition to his satisfying the court that he has a right which ought to be protected."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Interlocutory injunctions (pending trial) require showing: (1) a legal right needing protection (see Principle 412); (2) a serious question to be tried on the merits. “Serious question” means: non-frivolous claim with real prospect of success, substantial issues requiring trial, and more than arguable case (though certainty of success not required). This standard is higher than “arguable case” but lower than “strong prima facie case.” It prevents: injunctions for frivolous claims, pre-trial relief when claim lacks substance, and abuse of interlocutory process. Courts assess: are there genuine disputes of fact or law? does the claim raise substantial issues? is there real prospect the right claimed will be vindicated at trial? If no serious question exists: injunction is refused regardless of convenience factors, the claim appears destined to fail, and granting relief would be inappropriate. This threshold (along with legal right requirement) screens applications before reaching: balance of convenience, adequacy of damages, and other discretionary factors. Together, these requirements ensure interlocutory injunctions protect genuine legal rights in substantial disputes.