LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Interlocutory Injunction – Applicant Must Show Serious Question to Be Tried
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The court must be satisfied that the plaintiff's claim is not frivolous or vexatious and that there is a serious question to be tried at the hearing of the substantive suit before granting an interlocutory injunction.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Falomo v. Banigbe (1998) NLC-1271995(SC) at p. 11; Paras C–D.
"The court, on the question of the applicant's real prospect of success in the right claimed must, at the outset, be satisfied that the plaintiff's claim is ‘not frivolous or vexatious’ and that ‘there is a serious question to be tried at the hearing of the substantive suit.’"
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
An interlocutory injunction requires the applicant to show a serious question to be tried. The claim must not be frivolous or vexatious. The principle applies to all interlocutory injunctions. The court does not decide the merits at this stage. The applicant must have a real prospect of success. The rule balances the interests of both parties. The court will consider whether damages would be an adequate remedy. The principle is derived from American Cyanamid v. Ethicon. The applicant must also show that the balance of convenience favours granting the injunction.