Ammg Pty Ltd v Arndell

Ammg Pty Ltd sought an interlocutory injunction against Arndell, aiming to restrain the defendant from selling or dealing with certain property. The Federal Court was tasked with determining the appropriate relief. The central legal issues revolved around whether there was a serious question to be tried, and if the balance of convenience favoured granting the injunction.

The court examined the plaintiff's failure to provide evidence regarding their ability to satisfy an undertaking as to damages, as well as the plaintiff's delay in seeking injunctive relief. The court held that these factors significantly impacted the assessment of whether a serious question to be tried existed, and whether the balance of convenience warranted the grant of interlocutory relief. Ultimately, the court found that the plaintiff had not demonstrated a serious question to be tried and that the balance of convenience did not support the granting of the injunction.

Consequently, the court refused the plaintiff's application for an interlocutory injunction. The Federal Court emphasised the importance of timely and comprehensive evidence in such applications, as well as the need for careful consideration of the balance of convenience. The court's decision underscores the stringent criteria that must be met for interlocutory relief to be granted in cases involving property disputes.