header-logo header-logo

Civil procedure

28 May 2010
Issue: 7419 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Re Bloomsbury Int Ltd and others v Holyoake and others [2010] EWHC 1150 (Ch), [2010] All ER (D) 207 (May)

While a cross-undertaking would always be included in a coercive or restraining order (other than in cases brought by the Crown to enforce the law or to perform a public duty) there was no rule that an injunction would never be granted or continued if the cross-undertaking was of no real value.

The course to be taken was the course which would involve the least risk of ultimate injustice. In cases where the company had brought the claim, it might and often would be right to require the undertaking to be fortified by some amount, either by a personal undertaking from administrators or from elsewhere. It might be right that the administrators should give some undertaking albeit limited in amount. It was material to make a realistic, intelligent, estimate of the harm which the defendant might suffer; such an assessment should be limited to an enquiry as to whether there was a risk of loss. In the case

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll