How has Lawrence v Fen Tigers Ltd been treated at first instance, asks Andrew Francis
A key question arising from the judgment of the Supreme Court in Lawrence v Fen Tigers Ltd [2014] 1 AC 822, [2014] 2 All ER 622 was how trial judges would decide whether the proper remedy for breach of property rights was an injunction, or damages in lieu.
Fen Tigers stated two key principles. First, where there is a breach of property rights the prima facie position is that an injunction should be granted. Second, as to the choice between an injunction and damages, the outcome should depend on all relevant facts, circumstances and arguments. Overlying both principles is the point made by the Supreme Court in Fen Tigers that there should no longer be slavish adherence to the “good working rule” in Shelfer v City of London Electric Lighting Co Ltd [1895] 1 Ch 287, [1891-4] All ER Rep 838. While there were differences between the justices of the Supreme Court as to what might be relevant
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
