Interlocutory Injunction

Dott Services Ltd v Uganda National Roads Authority & Anor (MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE No. 228 OF 2017) [2017] UGCOMMC 152 (2 November 2017);


Headnote and Holding: 

The court considered whether the applicant had sufficient grounds for an interlocutory injunction to prevent the first respondent from entering into another contract.

The court held that there are three conditions that an applicant must show for a temporary interlocutory injunction. Firstly, must show that there is a prima facie case with a probability of success. Secondly, must show that he will suffer irreparable harm which will not be adequately compensated by an award for damages. Thirdly, the application is decided on a balance of convenience if the court is in doubt.

The court found that to establish a prima facie case the applicant must show that it is not a frivolous case, in that regard, the applicant did not show that there was a triable issue. Also found that irreparable harm must be substantial or material, in that light the applicant did not the likelihood of irreparable damages and any contemplated damages. The court also found that the balance of convenience was in favour of the respondent because if the injunction because the granting of the injunction would lead to indefinite termination.

Accordingly, the court dismissed the application with costs.

Subscribe to RSS - Interlocutory Injunction