LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE — Injunctions — Interlocutory Injunction — Court Not to Resolve Conflicts in Affidavit Evidence
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The court when considering an application for an interlocutory injunction should not try to resolve conflicts of evidence on affidavits as to facts on which the claims of either party may ultimately depend, or decide difficult questions of law which call for detailed argument.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogwuegbu, JSC, in Oduntan v. General Oil Limited (1995) NLC-731992(SC) at p. 8; Paras. A–C.
"The court when considering an application for interlocutory injunction of this nature should not try to resolve conflicts of evidence on affidavits as to facts on which the claims of either party may ultimately depend or decide difficult questions of law which call for detailed argument and consideration. A judge in determining such application must be careful and ensure that he does not in the determination of the application determine the same issues that would arise for determination in the substantive suit."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
On an interlocutory injunction application, the court should not resolve factual conflicts or decide difficult legal questions. Those issues are for the substantive trial. The principle applies to all interlocutory applications. The court should only determine whether there is a serious question to be tried. The rule prevents premature determination of the case. The court must avoid prejudging the merits. The judge should be careful not to decide the substantive issues. The principle promotes efficiency and fairness.